Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2017 00:58:24 +0900 From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> To: FreeBSD virtualization <freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Storage overhead on zvols Message-ID: <5A26C220.2000909@redbarn.org> In-Reply-To: <44AEC596-6BBA-44FB-92A1-99A0ED239B7A@punkt.de> References: <CC62E200-A749-4406-AC56-2FC7A104D353@ebureau.com> <CA%2BtpaK3GpzcwvRFGoX5xdmwGnGWay0z_kqgW6Tg7hX5UBbz4og@mail.gmail.com> <423F466A-732A-4B04-956E-3CC5F5C47390@ebureau.com> <5A26B9C8.7020005@redbarn.org> <32BA4687-AB70-4370-A9BA-EF4F66BF69A6@ebureau.com> <5A26BE25.10409@redbarn.org> <44AEC596-6BBA-44FB-92A1-99A0ED239B7A@punkt.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Patrick M. Hausen wrote: > I'm not an FS developer but from experience as an admin that > feature - nullfs mounts into a hypervisor - while greatly desired, > looks quite nontrivial to implement. i think what's called for is a vdd of some kind, similar to the virtual ethernet and virtual disk drivers. yes, it would appear in the guest at the vfs layer. i'm surprised that the qemu community doesn't already have it. this is something virtualbox gets wrong, by the way. it offers something that sounds like what i want, but then implements it as SMB. don't get be wrong -- UFS and NFS work for me, and i love bhyve as-is. -- P Vixie
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5A26C220.2000909>