From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 15 20:44:51 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 978EF16A4CE for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 20:44:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (hobbiton.shire.net [206.71.64.250]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F77D43D2F for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 20:44:51 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from chad@shire.net) Received: from [67.161.247.57] (helo=[192.168.99.66]) by hobbiton.shire.net with asmtp (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.10) id 1BlD62-000P90-00 for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:44:50 -0600 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v618) Message-Id: To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: "Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC" Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:44:47 -0600 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.618) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on hobbiton.shire.net X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_01 autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Level: Subject: unionfs on CURRENT for read only OK? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 20:44:51 -0000 Hi The man pages for unionfs basically say to avoid it as it has problems. However, I was wondering about people's experience with it for read only mounts. I would like to do a bunch of read only mounts. I currently use nfs with localhost: but think that performance might be better with unionfs. I kind of get the impression that the unionfs problems are with read write and so would like to solicit opinions and experience running on FBSD5 (CURRENT going to 5.3-R). Thanks Chad