From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 1 22:51:38 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20B98F51 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 22:51:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd8@a1poweruser.com) Received: from mail-03.name-services.com (mail-03.name-services.com [69.64.155.195]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E887B1B4B for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 22:51:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.0.10.1] ([173.88.202.176]) by mail-03.name-services.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 1 Mar 2013 14:51:39 -0800 Message-ID: <513130F8.4010308@a1poweruser.com> Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2013 17:51:36 -0500 From: Fbsd8 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Felder Subject: Re: Limiting jail CPU & memory resources References: <5130BD4D.5000305@a1poweruser.com> <5130CEC9.30005@a1poweruser.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Mar 2013 22:51:39.0424 (UTC) FILETIME=[55D2C200:01CE16CF] X-Sender: fbsd8@a1poweruser.com X-Authenticated-Sender: fbsd8@a1poweruser.com X-EchoSenderHash: [fbsd8]-[a1poweruser*com] Cc: FreeBSD questions X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2013 22:51:38 -0000 Mark Felder wrote: > On Fri, 01 Mar 2013 09:52:41 -0600, wrote: > >> Read that all ready and left me with more question than answers. >> Its experimental and has to be compiled into the kernel. >> Need solutions that are provided as part of the base system. >> Such as a loadable kernel module. >> Can not be risking the security of production jails on some >> experimental software. > > Unfortunately there's nothing else available yet. You'd be better off > using full-fledged hypervisors like Xen, KVM, or ESXi. I'm also > anxiously awaiting some improvement in this area. > > What do you think about the new jail.conf parameter cpuset.id from jail(8)? Seems to me it's a way to dedicate one or more CPUs to a single jail for increased jail performance. Really the opposite of limiting cpu resources to a jail.