From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 29 02:12:45 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 011A8106564A for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 02:12:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rsb@berentweb.com) Received: from mail-lpp01m010-f54.google.com (mail-lpp01m010-f54.google.com [209.85.215.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 677388FC15 for ; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 02:12:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lagv3 with SMTP id v3so2798475lag.13 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:12:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=berentweb.com; s=google; h=mime-version:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=Byfg/B212/6XGhj56UJyidNYa3lix06M5sJHLhB3YoE=; b=TYGMVScTlehdoWEEXtKOiB89T6vHBg7hsIGQYmNABPnuoajsk9I/s1oftd+OsOfeg8 GXo/GgLtLBD9f2NKk2ZQ0zTDHIYp7j+Yyi5lMJvE51bWCyI60uVCofwdDVuXq3tTmmAI j4fhk9TpIR6gDsewOoObGcgwTBmQeRy8xB3is= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :x-gm-message-state; bh=Byfg/B212/6XGhj56UJyidNYa3lix06M5sJHLhB3YoE=; b=oMca8h9kLpM/zt2+uSEhJeLrgtNP8XgpFxmnzcL623AQ2uQ3xSeh40jS3IPHHARB/N WEwiGlfjDyok7Lw7UMirNfdkKXfDlb8hjWATZ4LND8HE3owgc/7sggJfX7UvJnTEYqsj MztKaGMNvAeVK2UMhI6Xiw326RmR8CO4MFka8SP3zJpyHqeUSDRPIAlgmp2lpitE4ivB zAA6yvRUm8cc4Mq9tsEwkRx8VOwsf92wMYZ8z7TqKKYfryHMPBPhTtHO6Wx3THjuDX22 TZXnobfjLO5meZiFjQsc0bWugG4kZCh40GS7WQMokZqOHrj0Wmjicsvh8/OZb/7e3yIN fGsw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.133.144 with SMTP id pc16mr25655501lab.0.1332987163118; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:12:43 -0700 (PDT) Sender: rsb@berentweb.com Received: by 10.112.77.15 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:12:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [78.162.12.68] In-Reply-To: <0685CC3A-753B-4C5B-9E15-C0565B48F885@ultra-secure.de> References: <0685CC3A-753B-4C5B-9E15-C0565B48F885@ultra-secure.de> Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 05:12:43 +0300 X-Google-Sender-Auth: H66UaSJLYt9cy2qpQpP8JB7mMbw Message-ID: From: Beeblebrox To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkJC6/W6ApChrSf6ya8SedLLE/pGd9rwQwHYYZwMMUilKt6SZd0mN28DMjR4LGQ2KIlOvII Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: Re: jailed NFS server X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 02:12:45 -0000 Maybe I will give unfs3 a try. However, One of the reasons I'm trying to set it up is to be able to run Tinderbox on that jail for distributed compiling. When I did a little searching about unfs3 + Tinderbox + jail, it came up with posts about problems and that such setup "does not give good results". Any feedback about such setup? Also, is such "bad performance result" also valid for all types of HPC/parallel computing run from jails so that "Just Run From Host" becomes the defaul solution in these cases? Thanks and Regards. On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Rainer Duffner wrote: > > Am 28.03.2012 um 22:20 schrieb Beeblebrox: > > > Is it possible to get an NFS server working from inside a Jail, where > host > > storage is on ZFS? > > > Maybe try unfs3: > > http://www.freshports.org/net/unfs3/ > > > > Regards > Rainer >