Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 20:14:25 -0700 From: Brandon Fosdick <bfoz@terrandev.com> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca> Subject: Re: Jail to jail network performance? Message-ID: <43376791.3050609@terrandev.com> In-Reply-To: <20050914110102.W33820@fledge.watson.org> References: <432753CF.6020001@bfoz.net> <4327CA3C.6050403@geminix.org> <E1D91BF4-2EC3-4535-A83E-A0D136C87B5E@orthanc.ca> <20050914110102.W33820@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Watson wrote: > There are several ways you can do it, but they generally fall into two > classes of activies: > > (1) Modifying the name space exclusion assumption for jails, so that the > file system name spaces overlap. One way to do this is with nullfs. > > (2) Having a daemon or tool that runs outside of the jail and brokers > communication between the jails. One example might be a daemon that > inserts a UNIX domain socket into both jails and then provides > references to shared IPC objects between the two "by request". > Another example might be a daemon or tool that responds to a request > and creates a hard link from a socket/fifo endpoint visible in one > jail to a name visible in another jail, perhaps when setting up the > jail. The former requires more infrastructure, but the latter is less > flexible. The jail(8) man page says that if the MIB security.jail.sysvipc_allowed=1 processes inside a jail can use IPC to talk to stuff in other jails. How does that affect mysql in a jail? Do I need this enabled to run mysql?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43376791.3050609>