From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 21 22:09:54 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AE421065670; Mon, 21 May 2012 22:09:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexsm@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bk0-f54.google.com (mail-bk0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 951558FC08; Mon, 21 May 2012 22:09:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkvi18 with SMTP id i18so6004465bkv.13 for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 15:09:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=eF/7GQy/QrqeZ3clSzAqpt/tZBCMWOTZEZbeP+SkPuE=; b=VmntAeMgh7NfRli6A1+GXyP0I6NuOpXEOQSc+CxuB0L3aCjZJXItK8ThYKEXc15T/2 6M3c9m3D0FXg/kUAPWFZPTrc6l55ps+v3FGxyIfnWFukYPxH47+LrNBnAtgnmBZ76sNV Ib7ggPTCpwL8H95KPLrbNOp6/7kZYO/xEnthuiPX9OuEFRdEQca9ytpqI6C8bYWXM3Dt vx4VQjydR0ShIsHignTp9dbvfGLEfvE4QgDNIAHmjMU8YbZvzWeX+cYL12WJwQdYAy5b 0zxpXOBMSkNdsoqil+IBjqLV3M7799Tbm82jJVMgkfT90RWZ/v6h0+zifP78RSuyxIiq Orrg== Received: by 10.205.132.13 with SMTP id hs13mr9056420bkc.78.1337638187335; Mon, 21 May 2012 15:09:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.0.67 with HTTP; Mon, 21 May 2012 15:09:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120521184739.GA22790@mule.podro.com> References: <20120520170702.GY22790@mule.podro.com> <1120936952.633013.1337546532026.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> <20120521035323.GZ22790@mule.podro.com> <868vglud1e.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20120521184739.GA22790@mule.podro.com> From: Alex Moura Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 19:09:27 -0300 Message-ID: To: Jamie Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Rick Macklem , Vincent Hoffman , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav , Vance Siemens Subject: Re: FreeBSD 10 prognostication... X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 22:09:54 -0000 2012/5/21 Jamie > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:57:33AM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav wrote: > > No, they're not. VMWare, RHEV (KVM-based) etc. provide features such as > > seamless migration of virtual machines from one physical machine to > > another, automatic restart on a different physical server if one fails > > etc. that simply aren't possible with jails; and there are certain > > things you still can't run reliably / safely in jails - anything that > > relies on SysV IPC, for instance, such as PostgreSQL. > > True about the SysV, and I mostly agree about automatic failover. > > But I think the FreeBSD jail system is still the better model for how I > see these things being used (certainly the better *potential*). But yea, > not "quite" cloud. > > When coupled with something like rsync, they *almost* do the job. And for > a lot > of the current "VPS" applications, they do the job. > > But lets suppose you want proper redundancy and partitioned environments, > so, you put FreeBSD on a cloud, but partition your environments into jails. > > Now you have a cheap, low overhead way of doing logical partitioning and > you > still have a "cloud" with redundancy. > That'd fine if you are not taking in account other characteristics that make clouds, well, clouds, like: on-demand self-service, resource pooling, multi-tenancy and rapid elasticity. > (snip) > I threw jails out there because I personally consider them to be the > coolest > part of FreeBSD. > > Agreed that jails are cool and I would like very much to see a FreeBSD-based cloud implementation.