Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:44:10 +0100 From: "Simon L. Nielsen" <simon@FreeBSD.org> To: Denis Shaposhnikov <dsh@vlink.ru> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: the current status of nullfs, unionfs Message-ID: <20050310114410.GJ4908@eddie.nitro.dk> In-Reply-To: <87d5u7n2xh.fsf@neva.vlink.ru> References: <200503091838.06322.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <20050310004919.GA34206@hub.freebsd.org> <87d5u7n2xh.fsf@neva.vlink.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On 2005.03.10 14:41:30 +0300, Denis Shaposhnikov wrote: > >>>>> "Kris" == Kris Kennaway <kris@freebsd.org> writes: > > Kris> nullfs seems to work fine, unionfs is very fragile and easily > Kris> exploded. > > nullfs is absolutely useless for jail's because TOO slow. That obviously depend on your use of jails and nullfs. It works just fine for me. -- Simon L. Nielsen [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFCMDMKh9pcDSc1mlERAkXeAJ9Frkj4S6Tzxu7TdX40vriUrfOjUwCePLRy YNbuGPj/hdcZfM/27t0s5ac= =0qOy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050310114410.GJ4908>