From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 27 06:55:05 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64518106566C for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 06:55:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-current@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E52B8FC20 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 06:55:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-current@m.gmane.org) Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Jem0s-0007K2-V4 for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 06:55:02 +0000 Received: from 195.208.174.178 ([195.208.174.178]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 06:55:02 +0000 Received: from vadim_nuclight by 195.208.174.178 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 06:55:02 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org From: Vadim Goncharov Followup-To: gmane.os.freebsd.current Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 06:51:37 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Nuclear Lightning @ Tomsk, TPU AVTF Hostel Lines: 30 Message-ID: References: <47E9448F.1010304@ipfw.ru> <20080326142115.K34007@fledge.watson.org> <20080327062556.GE3180@home.opsec.eu> X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.208.174.178 X-Comment-To: Kurt Jaeger User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.1 (FreeBSD) Sender: news Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: unionfs status X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: vadim_nuclight@mail.ru List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 06:55:05 -0000 Hi Kurt Jaeger! On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 07:25:56 +0100; Kurt Jaeger wrote about 'Re: unionfs status': >>> If you're using unionfs >>> to take a template system and "broadcast it" to many jails, you probably don't >>> want all the jails talking to the same syslogd, you want them each talking to >>> their own. When syslogd in a jail finds a disconnected socket, which is >>> effectively what a NULL v_socket pointer means, in /var/run/log, it should be >>> unlinking it and creating a new socket, not reusing the existing file on disk. >> This code's use in jails is primarily intended for mysql (and the like >> daemons), not syslogd (for which you said it right). Such daemons really >> require broadcasting, yep - so unionfs should support it... > Thanks for this description. So we basically have two different > uses for UNIX sockets in unionfs with jails ? > 1) socket in jail to communicate only inside one jail (syslog-case) > 2) socket in jail as a means of IPC between different jails (mysql-case) > Is 2) really supposed to work like this ? This is user's/admin's point of view, that it should work this way: one mysql with one socket for several jails. I don't know all gory details about how code really works. -- WBR, Vadim Goncharov. ICQ#166852181 mailto:vadim_nuclight@mail.ru [Moderator of RU.ANTI-ECOLOGY][FreeBSD][http://antigreen.org][LJ:/nuclight]