From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Fri Jul 31 10:30:51 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49A569AFA83 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 10:30:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from k@free.de) Received: from smtp.free.de (smtp.free.de [91.204.6.103]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC1E513BB for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 10:30:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from k@free.de) Received: (qmail 10460 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2015 12:24:07 +0200 Received: from smtp.free.de (HELO [91.204.7.54]) (k@free.de@[91.204.4.103]) (envelope-sender ) by smtp.free.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 31 Jul 2015 12:24:07 +0200 Message-ID: <55BB4CC5.2050004@free.de> Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 12:24:05 +0200 From: Kai Gallasch Organization: FREE! User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Subject: sysutils/iocage in a NAS environment Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="2pu8DLjwo7DiVTTlMUs5kJIrE1twXAJwH" X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 10:30:51 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --2pu8DLjwo7DiVTTlMUs5kJIrE1twXAJwH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi. Just read that FreeNAS 10 is going to use sysutils/iocage for managing local jails on the NAS. That is great news and it will give iocage more publicity and a wider user base! I am currently testing a FreeNAS 9 as a NAS for my FreeBSD servers. Each (FreeBSD 10) server is running between 10-50 iocage jails. iocage's documentation states that each iocage installation needs a zpool to run on. So the only way I see to use a NAS for iocage deployment would be to make use of iSCSI (block based) mounts. The NAS would offer an iscsi target to the jailhost. When mounted, it just shows up as a block based LUN. You then could create a zpool on this LUN and use this zpool for iocage. (Each time the jailhost starts up, the iSCSI mount + zpool import would have to happen automatically) Does this approach make any sense when both performance or stability are needed? Is it generally adviseable to use zpools on iSCSI targets, because they are basically iSCSI exported zvols running on top of another zpool? Regards, Kai. --=20 PGP-KeyID =3D 0x70654D7C4FB1F588 --2pu8DLjwo7DiVTTlMUs5kJIrE1twXAJwH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVu0zFAAoJEHBlTXxPsfWIMFIP/2EUYw3XmqVjTXIEflD77124 bNxXNbY4qofqZSMMJpZUHP2IAcV0cwPixo5i+IgLewLpEDuSyqjU/SAnxbhnhwt4 MJFWvzzNNDWu3UDYkFx5Ry4/PZclvzH96XJ++ICA0k7rULw9MuOSUOdHtD/coUMy OzBDsnoTCWzH4d9bW7ya3aYf2yDquAm8IJqLHwEbsVo9373BO0Qr1+8XqHMnRrqG oTmwO9f0J+cWOlPrWbRhlm1YZo+wxOMoTAUZ1ucmATETw0/pw95yGwohg3zRmXGQ 0vjZQzvtV40Mf+Uk+emBEAHRSb3yz0IQqs60x4UVgDCgEno/xohTVPwHejhuMk/k iHvZCKLjPrmE5hW6rGVH2bX/PXdV5Gmf+wvsUDL7Rm+DRLHRjOnUwqoJ6U57HnuD h3K8/jPQnMbsT7yrIwzRnjEJEDzYTu99SMIiguJ9T3FXWfKWbFwU8AffbaMUpjxk Nur9I85e3kcLF9aGA4F0s9dhsogZfBzjnk1j5ecy4174GVu+vzAVHdcmT2oMOoVo un3f8h/6WA2CQSCeXr5TY9ayJdu7XEn9FtuJK/S3TgcG86BIucDgd6WnJwCS6OsB cyHU0hYz+qd6RyypOu76qMkqXYrUixqLaOQg1wnCB2SDe2VwZI98ejJruZwcFAei IYGv6t87zR+RJwl2TbA0 =2Xix -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --2pu8DLjwo7DiVTTlMUs5kJIrE1twXAJwH-- From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Fri Jul 31 14:22:53 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57C6B9AEE23 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:22:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from allanjude@freebsd.org) Received: from mx1.scaleengine.net (mx1.scaleengine.net [209.51.186.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 379BB1DDE for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:22:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from allanjude@freebsd.org) Received: from [10.1.1.2] (unknown [10.1.1.2]) (Authenticated sender: allanjude.freebsd@scaleengine.com) by mx1.scaleengine.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D78F29B4E for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:22:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: sysutils/iocage in a NAS environment To: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org References: <55BB4CC5.2050004@free.de> From: Allan Jude Message-ID: <55BB84AF.5040808@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 10:22:39 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <55BB4CC5.2050004@free.de> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="sphNnMCWB2fa62iGji3SvGQDq7QaDJJs7" X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:22:53 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --sphNnMCWB2fa62iGji3SvGQDq7QaDJJs7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2015-07-31 06:24, Kai Gallasch wrote: >=20 > Hi. >=20 > Just read that FreeNAS 10 is going to use sysutils/iocage for managing > local jails on the NAS. That is great news and it will give iocage more= > publicity and a wider user base! >=20 > I am currently testing a FreeNAS 9 as a NAS for my FreeBSD servers. Eac= h > (FreeBSD 10) server is running between 10-50 iocage jails. >=20 > iocage's documentation states that each iocage installation needs a > zpool to run on. >=20 > So the only way I see to use a NAS for iocage deployment would be to > make use of iSCSI (block based) mounts. The NAS would offer an iscsi > target to the jailhost. When mounted, it just shows up as a block based= > LUN. You then could create a zpool on this LUN and use this zpool for > iocage. (Each time the jailhost starts up, the iSCSI mount + zpool > import would have to happen automatically) >=20 > Does this approach make any sense when both performance or stability ar= e > needed? >=20 > Is it generally adviseable to use zpools on iSCSI targets, because they= > are basically iSCSI exported zvols running on top of another zpool? >=20 > Regards, > Kai. >=20 If FreeBSD 9 is your NAS, why are the disks remote? Normally, you'd run iocage on the NAS (the machine with the physical disks in it) and have direct access to the zpool. --=20 Allan Jude --sphNnMCWB2fa62iGji3SvGQDq7QaDJJs7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVu4S7AAoJEBmVNT4SmAt+7LIP/j5S4CuAVnmj/qSkCrW77yHY 0Cwbce/S97piKuVbJc0VTQupNeRnXIRGX/GL3vXDPDmh6xbjCuU/OMumXleE+bv6 SJ3jsL7+7JFeTUWGJVcqLTKK0ZL3NFsZ9U9MIkCY46WGvQzK8I9S67aqFvKdEi7a tW2PIvqxo9qg1fS/cRTC9JWcZT0gPX6/qBKD3Ocvw97J1RJQoV/hNPIUprGDe2kC hmSrXZ3k5Q9fmBPs/smdL9ctRP9Ib7oPX/b8XY57sEclv9mbdBLixBWIbuYYsqZH b2kv12y17ObtAVJTeGn4WfexF77zm15UEJMQSG0vWgFf+RJvWbnvJWsv6GwJqfFq 26Gv1KsUSDexJebg2F/dEDkcpEKXxL4Fq5TQ1QhpCqb9X5nkgK9EH1ahIcmXzqOt 0btkFt5/62JR2FZOA5y+aBtI/1VvOPWYZkJ7uJ7ZFd7tKZARATsQwvlFwNJ3es7i 6mJDhcttA0R2zYuxM2ne2BZC/0lYfIB+/N5DuIlhOMELgBtW1GZthL2dcjXuyXXY RcoZ5+em/djF9DRg7GcPpbGmrmcPqV574fx0I8IrJVhXKqFcmSfppMjNh3SH1ps5 YX5jscJ87NsjPHe8ffJ3kgL/GlBvNhk0kEDiKixcYLU2M9tXTRz8lLPWb3r2kZeE gPv6P8PmqRvHDxxNTEAp =sbPk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --sphNnMCWB2fa62iGji3SvGQDq7QaDJJs7-- From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Fri Jul 31 14:50:37 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DA339AF3CF for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:50:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andrew.hotlab@hotmail.com) Received: from DUB004-OMC3S3.hotmail.com (dub004-omc3s3.hotmail.com [157.55.2.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.outlook.com", Issuer "MSIT Machine Auth CA 2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD76B1027; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:50:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andrew.hotlab@hotmail.com) Received: from DUB131-W68 ([157.55.2.9]) by DUB004-OMC3S3.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.23008); Fri, 31 Jul 2015 07:49:27 -0700 X-TMN: [KeA7wkFv7iwUDUDfldH5YD5t7CAc0uyr] X-Originating-Email: [andrew.hotlab@hotmail.com] Message-ID: From: Andrew Hotlab To: Allan Jude , FreeBSD-Jail Subject: RE: sysutils/iocage in a NAS environment Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 16:49:27 +0200 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <55BB84AF.5040808@freebsd.org> References: <55BB4CC5.2050004@free.de>,<55BB84AF.5040808@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Jul 2015 14:49:27.0478 (UTC) FILETIME=[1961A560:01D0CBA0] X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:50:37 -0000 ----------------------------------------=0A= > Subject: Re: sysutils/iocage in a NAS environment=0A= > To: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org=0A= > From: allanjude@freebsd.org=0A= > Date: Fri=2C 31 Jul 2015 10:22:39 -0400=0A= >=0A= > On 2015-07-31 06:24=2C Kai Gallasch wrote:=0A= >>=0A= >> Hi.=0A= >>=0A= >> Just read that FreeNAS 10 is going to use sysutils/iocage for managing= =0A= >> local jails on the NAS. That is great news and it will give iocage more= =0A= >> publicity and a wider user base!=0A= >>=0A= >> I am currently testing a FreeNAS 9 as a NAS for my FreeBSD servers. Each= =0A= >> (FreeBSD 10) server is running between 10-50 iocage jails.=0A= >>=0A= >> iocage's documentation states that each iocage installation needs a=0A= >> zpool to run on.=0A= >>=0A= >> So the only way I see to use a NAS for iocage deployment would be to=0A= >> make use of iSCSI (block based) mounts. The NAS would offer an iscsi=0A= >> target to the jailhost. When mounted=2C it just shows up as a block base= d=0A= >> LUN. You then could create a zpool on this LUN and use this zpool for=0A= >> iocage. (Each time the jailhost starts up=2C the iSCSI mount + zpool=0A= >> import would have to happen automatically)=0A= >>=0A= >> Does this approach make any sense when both performance or stability are= =0A= >> needed?=0A= >>=0A= >> Is it generally adviseable to use zpools on iSCSI targets=2C because the= y=0A= >> are basically iSCSI exported zvols running on top of another zpool?=0A= >>=0A= >> Regards=2C=0A= >> Kai.=0A= >>=0A= >=0A= > If FreeBSD 9 is your NAS=2C why are the disks remote?=0A= >=0A= > Normally=2C you'd run iocage on the NAS (the machine with the physical=0A= > disks in it) and have direct access to the zpool.=0A= >=0A= =0A= I guess that Kai looks at FreeNAS as=2C well... only a NAS. I mean=2C an ap= pliance=0A= whom the main task is to provide networked storage to servers=2C which are= =0A= running=2C in his example=2C another version of FreeBSD.=0A= =0A= Personally I'm in line with him by preferring to manage ZFS pools at the OS= =0A= layer and not at the SAN/NAS layer. Actually=2C I'm currently working for t= esting=0A= a solution where a number of "SAN nodes" simply provide to "computational= =0A= nodes" (via iSCSI) access to physical disks (each disk will be seen as an= =0A= iSCSI LUN). In such a design=2C SAN nodes will become a sort of "networked= =0A= disk providers"=2C running with minimal complexity and resources=2C while Z= FS=0A= pool creation=2C dataset and zvol management will be done by servers' OS.= =0A= =0A= My goal is to cut off layers (no more ZFS on iSCSI LUNs on zvol on physical= =0A= disks) to simplify management=2C reduce complexity and hardware requirement= s=2C=0A= in order to allow any computational node to import and export ZFS pools bui= lt=0A= by vdevs composed by mirrored disks (each of them provided by a different= =0A= =A0storage node)=2C thus obtaining fault-tolerance of servers=2C storage no= des and=0A= physical disks.=0A= =0A= If someone is interested=2C I'll be glad to post the result of performance = tests with=0A= near-production hardware. I'll should have them before the end of this mont= h.=0A= =0A= Regards.=0A= =0A= Andrew = From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Fri Jul 31 14:53:28 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 391AC9AF60C for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:53:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from k@free.de) Received: from smtp.free.de (smtp.free.de [91.204.6.103]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AADDB167E for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:53:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from k@free.de) Received: (qmail 95394 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2015 16:53:23 +0200 Received: from smtp.free.de (HELO [91.204.7.54]) (k@free.de@[91.204.4.103]) (envelope-sender ) by smtp.free.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 31 Jul 2015 16:53:23 +0200 Message-ID: <55BB8BE1.8050808@free.de> Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 16:53:21 +0200 From: Kai Gallasch Organization: FREE! User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Allan Jude CC: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sysutils/iocage in a NAS environment References: <55BB4CC5.2050004@free.de> <55BB84AF.5040808@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <55BB84AF.5040808@freebsd.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="b45wnBUgx6iQsqGw5ndQEFT7VCalC7JJT" X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:53:28 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --b45wnBUgx6iQsqGw5ndQEFT7VCalC7JJT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 31.07.2015 16:22 Allan Jude wrote: > On 2015-07-31 06:24, Kai Gallasch wrote: >> >> Hi. >> >> Just read that FreeNAS 10 is going to use sysutils/iocage for managing= >> local jails on the NAS. That is great news and it will give iocage mor= e >> publicity and a wider user base! >> >> I am currently testing a FreeNAS 9 as a NAS for my FreeBSD servers. Ea= ch >> (FreeBSD 10) server is running between 10-50 iocage jails. >> >> iocage's documentation states that each iocage installation needs a >> zpool to run on. >> >> So the only way I see to use a NAS for iocage deployment would be to >> make use of iSCSI (block based) mounts. The NAS would offer an iscsi >> target to the jailhost. When mounted, it just shows up as a block base= d >> LUN. You then could create a zpool on this LUN and use this zpool for >> iocage. (Each time the jailhost starts up, the iSCSI mount + zpool >> import would have to happen automatically) >> >> Does this approach make any sense when both performance or stability a= re >> needed? >> >> Is it generally adviseable to use zpools on iSCSI targets, because the= y >> are basically iSCSI exported zvols running on top of another zpool? >> >> Regards, >> Kai. >> >=20 > If FreeBSD 9 is your NAS, why are the disks remote? >=20 > Normally, you'd run iocage on the NAS (the machine with the physical > disks in it) and have direct access to the zpool. I understand that this would result in the best performance, but how am I to run FreeBSD 10 or 11 jails on this NAS appliance that is plain FreeBSD9 ? The current state is (as I wrote), that I manage several jail hosts in a rack, which are just running jails using the iocage tool. What I want to achieve with FreeNAS is to have the jail data centralized on the NAS and the jail hosts just "mounting" the jail data and running the jails. The benefit would be that if one server dies or needs to be completely rebuild, I just remount the jails on another active server, without much service interruption. In my experience when running a bunch of jail hosts with local jail data, much time and effort is wasted moving data around if you want to change hardware or have failed hardware, etc. K. --=20 PGP-KeyID =3D 0x70654D7C4FB1F588 --b45wnBUgx6iQsqGw5ndQEFT7VCalC7JJT Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVu4vhAAoJEHBlTXxPsfWIkaMP/jp9F5TQFYmGlXrbYcfmleiy zaD2BZq4mAd+RH7/8GDVzgvYMiDTXxhmu2+4PIVx4OZSovKAco43lxZNkRe1/674 kRryB+rHXWJX+oLPAEcYP5+/TnTHlbBAPMoHQRCSHH9zTYiYbOYqPtSyA16GBIMi sfiyxAvgSw1BAXSoGGrrzn+MoUs7BiFYXkwRKmtGt0n2gA/d/IjoNy4yA8jHjfs7 M2Hg6FBiocOfwEp0GW8Wcji3+A8FWxy+C0zeOrbaeM+KWPOxDXS3jhmTxt4NRk1B HfQ7UeE3CjnO78x8ImiIMWuYZFDYU4tj2ZzV+n5cdrbzyqV9ouFld7HJEhfN++s7 gitWhiKS3WJfsLQCzdMzMDFuE10WJt+MyR5bP26Oz/ZW1vzXc6WMjwFEHg+bimj4 4vK04KSlH3STBaWIqhSAyfyAW9fDr8ex9lzTdMoiX75Ito3hUbxeeUh20vxvmQd4 u6FVxwrWCEsHv3IsPCmc63iVW+pH8vtNZIoOcXyj7J6xidP4IClgQlZWFd1qFGtW P8y6khLQOQ8+XHrdcptApjL30DEGSKeFlTL5aZ8N35nUilqxksAJC+w6dLjHPmfN A+Af6iRZ8ZylmyHfWOiXj+3nUzG9cRuh1kq28Af4i9G7xln3eMs87fLMokyz+MQM nvOLCKh8Pk1iKd4U7vaN =6yUA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --b45wnBUgx6iQsqGw5ndQEFT7VCalC7JJT-- From owner-freebsd-jail@freebsd.org Fri Jul 31 14:59:10 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-jail@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60FDB9AF6FF for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:59:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from allanjude@freebsd.org) Received: from mx1.scaleengine.net (mx1.scaleengine.net [209.51.186.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 236121BA3 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:59:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from allanjude@freebsd.org) Received: from [10.1.1.2] (unknown [10.1.1.2]) (Authenticated sender: allanjude.freebsd@scaleengine.com) by mx1.scaleengine.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6B7319BED; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:59:09 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: sysutils/iocage in a NAS environment To: Kai Gallasch References: <55BB4CC5.2050004@free.de> <55BB84AF.5040808@freebsd.org> <55BB8BE1.8050808@free.de> Cc: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org From: Allan Jude X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Message-ID: <55BB8D38.5000500@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 10:59:04 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <55BB8BE1.8050808@free.de> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="k6OSAPqIPvs9WdiQE9jc6w2b4Bjp35j95" X-BeenThere: freebsd-jail@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion about FreeBSD jail\(8\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:59:10 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --k6OSAPqIPvs9WdiQE9jc6w2b4Bjp35j95 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2015-07-31 10:53, Kai Gallasch wrote: >=20 >=20 > On 31.07.2015 16:22 Allan Jude wrote: >> On 2015-07-31 06:24, Kai Gallasch wrote: >>> >>> Hi. >>> >>> Just read that FreeNAS 10 is going to use sysutils/iocage for managin= g >>> local jails on the NAS. That is great news and it will give iocage mo= re >>> publicity and a wider user base! >>> >>> I am currently testing a FreeNAS 9 as a NAS for my FreeBSD servers. E= ach >>> (FreeBSD 10) server is running between 10-50 iocage jails. >>> >>> iocage's documentation states that each iocage installation needs a >>> zpool to run on. >>> >>> So the only way I see to use a NAS for iocage deployment would be to >>> make use of iSCSI (block based) mounts. The NAS would offer an iscsi >>> target to the jailhost. When mounted, it just shows up as a block bas= ed >>> LUN. You then could create a zpool on this LUN and use this zpool for= >>> iocage. (Each time the jailhost starts up, the iSCSI mount + zpool >>> import would have to happen automatically) >>> >>> Does this approach make any sense when both performance or stability = are >>> needed? >>> >>> Is it generally adviseable to use zpools on iSCSI targets, because th= ey >>> are basically iSCSI exported zvols running on top of another zpool? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Kai. >>> >> >> If FreeBSD 9 is your NAS, why are the disks remote? >> >> Normally, you'd run iocage on the NAS (the machine with the physical >> disks in it) and have direct access to the zpool. >=20 > I understand that this would result in the best performance, but how am= > I to run FreeBSD 10 or 11 jails on this NAS appliance that is plain > FreeBSD9 ? >=20 > The current state is (as I wrote), that I manage several jail hosts in = a > rack, which are just running jails using the iocage tool. >=20 > What I want to achieve with FreeNAS is to have the jail data centralize= d > on the NAS and the jail hosts just "mounting" the jail data and running= > the jails. The benefit would be that if one server dies or needs to be > completely rebuild, I just remount the jails on another active server, > without much service interruption. >=20 > In my experience when running a bunch of jail hosts with local jail > data, much time and effort is wasted moving data around if you want to > change hardware or have failed hardware, etc. >=20 > K. >=20 Ok, I understand your use case better now. iSCSI (or geom gate) to share the block device looks to be your only options if you want to use iocage which depends on ZFS. You could use a different jail management tool that doesn't depend on ZFS, and then use NFS or something, but then it is harder to trigger snapshots etc, since you'd have to do that via the remote NAS. If this was the only use case for the NAS, you might consider exposing the raw disks via iSCSI and creating the zpools (and the redundancy) inside the jail hosts. This would avoid the zpool on iscsi on zvol complexity. Of course this is harder to conceptualize, especially if you want to 'pool' storage for maximum utilization. --=20 Allan Jude --k6OSAPqIPvs9WdiQE9jc6w2b4Bjp35j95 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVu409AAoJEBmVNT4SmAt+N5AP/0i2frQI4Z9CHRw5m2LsjEZ3 +BcxXvPbR0W9xqgfRQ4jH6m0WUJhZS381TjIBgplEaVkaqLqsC2AreGF5dtdIf7L DYxsQK519UHoI8qQcpC84QxbTEoUxmnfSNPSBOQYlcnD01fpJcmoyOv9vY7SHxzu OaWk9tp4fc8L2cOHT1wATUsYfRYy8tGrKAFZPbe0x702VL0pn7AKJ5ui264UCa0v u4+yTGwOyUNcW+9CNCMtsuOA1bB8XUNOkhlO4Ul4gutTNjgi+eCGJRnab6FkWfTl TUstYPhQNZrHPIJ3njY9s2Xb1/PWasnveV8N7j1baG8ybF5i7ZjRWjD4hcLpmG1c BHSB+fMmpG2gbb0xo5mrTdW9rvxdtDeOz5BmsU+JzBIEnZH1dyyJ058jy+Ed92H1 iFBsCajE7m7aez554BzSnvmI51N3ecdZwcvTcV5Pm3hqN20gs5CSuqMGgGikDqWP 2iPJCzdTyVgKid1NNKYL0LlkV/RBwUVAaxR8lIjxNzFlR4LIEsBZn+aRE8oM1QGj a+WL1K97OBhfpO9WS3qCINjVNinXV/6/EtCdJwkIoAXG12apwF5kI9/MYjr0XDfF i8tJkOVTzUAmlwLqD/2frvGD+T1pvhvxLh6VzL5llesYvahTyJz3LMVJTJwvNb18 R3948iuGta10pFJkeZoU =kifu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --k6OSAPqIPvs9WdiQE9jc6w2b4Bjp35j95--