Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2003 02:03:08 -0300 (ADT) From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> To: BSD <bsd@xtremedev.com> Cc: User KATRINA <katrina@firewire.nightrealmstudios.com> Subject: Re: Sharing among jails Message-ID: <20030727015915.F81611@hub.org> In-Reply-To: <20030726194123.GA23196@Amber.XtremeDev.com> References: <20030726112605.E439@firewire.nightrealmstudios.com> <20030726194123.GA23196@Amber.XtremeDev.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003, BSD wrote: > IMHO, the best way would be to use mount_union or mount_null (I still > can't figure out what's the difference between them...) of the ports > directory. However, that said, I tried that myself about a year back, > and accesses in the jail caused my FreeBSD machine to lock up solid. So > I guess the warnings in the BUGS section of the mount_union and > mount_null man pages are still in full effect. *Alot* has changed in a year ... I use UNIONFS to share between 60 jails on one server right now, and the server has been purring *knock on wood* up 19+08:28, 0 users, load 10.66, 11.52, 10.17 As for the difference between UNION and NULL ... and someone more knowledge will hopefully correct me, but based on my experience ... If you UNIONfs a file system over top of another, you can use NULLfs to "seperate" the two ... as an example, if you UNIONFS /usr/ports under /jail/usr/ports and do a du of /jail/usr/ports, you will get everything ... if you NULLFS mount /jail/usr/ports to /null/usr/ports, and do /null/usr/ports, you will get only those files that are *on* /jail/usr/ports ... Basically, NULLFS gives the same result as if you unmounted the UNIONFS and looked at /jail/usr/ports ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030727015915.F81611>