From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 9 13:30:40 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57E7D1065670 for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 13:30:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aimass@yabarana.com) Received: from mail-we0-f182.google.com (mail-we0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D31338FC15 for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 13:30:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by werg1 with SMTP id g1so236934wer.13 for ; Wed, 09 May 2012 06:30:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=JqxNLwT5d/Yj693gbJ9Z8tZj7ZbWmPTtUgv6h/4cgrA=; b=BkW5kl6J2/tN3+NsLFQ0SAiKhWcfttLeFaGZDYR4m9QadiNrd5z45Irdp8UhjClDsa G3it+SQ8lfsMf+rc10+MX9xmqX81U17xWZGkGuctaxKvp96P9OMtt+uyUTJQVa8hOGxf 7gOMEqxvsSP5sqUJlfCYJA2Ok+4ExMx2vHQh4vDpJU9Qtt5HaCQp+wSS3qCx5psM9HVk f44WGPgKy4mkyeWMxPPNQaiHG5Ty4pXSh9zVWVFo/UYht+jsm3iLiRMUhfR48H79H+H8 CLXH60N94WWb+OX2MPTfZl2un6FWqUzUMSO7h9r+0+8JCeJukDEEVhsN5JjtO4pvUD3z 9lRA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.88.199 with SMTP id bi7mr1495870igb.26.1336570237786; Wed, 09 May 2012 06:30:37 -0700 (PDT) Sender: aimass@yabarana.com Received: by 10.231.74.138 with HTTP; Wed, 9 May 2012 06:30:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201205091953.28091.erich@alogreentechnologies.com> References: <201205091953.28091.erich@alogreentechnologies.com> Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 09:30:37 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: PScRhQ4pP-8aF4msh29Q1kijuZ0 Message-ID: From: Alejandro Imass To: Erich Dollansky Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQllVKjjtdFkNeSBRWgGgkR2S1i7gwpD+Q9g0ysnpjqVPZMqGDkjkGGF+drIxJQJPcSsiDhc Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, Robert Bonomi Subject: Re: UFS Crash and directories now missing X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 13:30:40 -0000 On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Erich Dollansky wrote: > Hi, > > On Wednesday 09 May 2012 18:57:06 Alejandro Imass wrote: >> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote: >> > On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Robert Bonomi wrote: >> >> >> >> [...] >> >> >> One comment: for 'defensive' purposes it would be useful to break ad6= up >> >> into two slices, putting 'basejail' in it's own slice. =A0Then, for p= roduction >> >> use, that slice can be mounted RO, and with the 'system immutable' fl= ag >> >> set on everything in that filesystem. >> >> >> > >> > Yes. From one of your posts that became somewhat clear to me: Having >> > all the jails on a single 150GB slice seems like a bad idea. >> > >> >> For your recommendation above, what are the advantages or differences >> of slicing the disk versus partitioning on a single slice? >> > it could be a misunderstanding. What is a partition? What is a slice. I h= ave to look always into the handbook. Anyway, as long the OS see different = units which have to be mounted independent of each other, it all does not m= atter what is what. > I meant in Unix terms of course. Slice is slice (partition in other OS) and partition a thru h The question is if it has any advantage of using a slice to mount the basejail in RO as opposed to doing the same thing on a partition. Thanks, --=20 Alejandro Imass