From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 25 18:14:47 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C11C84E for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 18:14:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsd@todoo.biz) Received: from newmail.rmm.fr (newmail.rmm.fr [213.251.152.9]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32D04E71 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 18:14:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from newmail.rmm.fr (newmail.rmm.fr [213.251.152.9]) by newmail.rmm.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7344714871B for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:14:46 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new 2.8.0 (20120630) at rmm.fr Received: from newmail.rmm.fr ([213.251.152.9]) by newmail.rmm.fr (newmail.rmm.fr [213.251.152.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id MqPpjOrVXEOA for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:14:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from newmail.rmm.fr (newmail.rmm.fr [87.98.206.99]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hidden) by newmail.rmm.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 28B15148716 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:14:46 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Subject: Re: Best approach to jails + zfs From: bsd In-Reply-To: <20130125174152.385948bbc82410a3eecc4472@sohara.org> Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:14:45 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <193A9ED3-53E5-474B-AECA-4B2652356283@todoo.biz> References: <6951EF94-E2BD-4B03-9F42-EA94BD23B718@todoo.biz> <20130125174152.385948bbc82410a3eecc4472@sohara.org> To: Liste FreeBSD X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) 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, 25 Jan 2013 18:14:47 -0000 Le 25 janv. 2013 =E0 18:41, Steve O'Hara-Smith a =E9crit : > On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 18:25:06 +0100 > bsd wrote: >=20 >> Hi,=20 >>=20 >> I wanted to have the point of view of the community on the best = approach >> in order to handle a quite large system with couple of jails = (shouldn't >> have more than 5 to 10). Whole system is based on zfs. I'll use this = as a >> backup server. >=20 > You might like the sysutils/ezjail port - I use it for a very > similar purpose and find it works well. >=20 > --=20 > Steve O'Hara-Smith I am a bit skeptical on the third party script approach.=20 How stable has It been ?=20 I have been using warden with PC-BSD "TrueOS" for testing and I have = encountered all sorts of problems (not stable when you have two pools of = disks - can't delete jail=85)=85 Quite interesting approach, but not = mature enough to be launched in production.=20 I have finally gotten back to the FreeBSD root file system which I am = using since couple of years now. It is not fancy, It does not provide = script to ease your pain=85 But you understand what you are doing and It = does what you tell him to do !!=20 ZFS has introduced a new challenge, but now that I have understood (more = or less) how It is working, I found It really great!=20 Just trying to figure out the best way to use both Jail + ZFS.=20 But I might re-consider my position=85 Does ezjail comply with the = latest FreeBSD 9 / 9.1 advances in jail / ZFS management improvement ?=20= Thanks for your feedback.=20 =96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96= =96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96 ---------> Gr=E9gory Bernard Director <--------- ---------------> www.osnet.eu <--------------- --> Your provider of OpenSource appliances <-- =96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96= =96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96=96 OSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetOSnetO