From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 22 01:16:55 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2811E106564A for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 01:16:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amvandemore@gmail.com) Received: from mail-gx0-f182.google.com (mail-gx0-f182.google.com [209.85.161.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B30EC8FC13 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 01:16:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by gxk24 with SMTP id 24so5154186gxk.13 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:16:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=TzwExsKiMbLF5O6SMX9qjvJpeRZRt6OtZykBLM3Q1QM=; b=tIq2geKXjASeiXWHynpFcCbAd5AUUJgJVfDwEttydz+4cGVRkvaes0x4VYO7uoDemk orMhhvymvsZSWAPHMsV3+oNWyaDudCAn6pjJO6jNAGZ6CqvmMMm6qrp2rRjSM3Ynk91r BGNqp9O6DIP+aN8PIHYnJG8SJQTYXVwswDfrk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=f2BLd+CM1xfUqEG4JjeUVsvog6nCnRTm50RgD8HjA2XqLHxYqPFCMoF9qcSm3j4lba Bats+mVLWT/R/Sb4vaU15b7dcs96Xf5Uu1Odx6JpoQE0brnqLOU3F54CI6ijYbYLIt+Z i5Q4Y1smVdZMNgDHKULErr9W9ibw/8D2uObN0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.53.150 with SMTP id m22mr756645qag.316.1279761413274; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:16:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.29.71 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:16:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4C46C356.6000101@comclark.com> References: <4C452644.6060508@comclark.com> <20100720134205.3168f4f1@scorpio> <4C45EA1C.6070601@comclark.com> <20100720153209.74ec26e6@scorpio> <4C45FCE1.7010006@comclark.com> <20100720163651.0daf727d@scorpio> <4C46BAAD.5000507@unsane.co.uk> <4C46C356.6000101@comclark.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 20:16:53 -0500 Message-ID: From: Adam Vande More To: Aiza Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, Vincent Hoffman Subject: Re: new jail utility is available. announcement. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 01:16:55 -0000 On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Aiza wrote: > > Not yet, when I have a spare box I might, although I quite like using >> zfs for jails as you can limit the disk usage dynamically per zfs >> filesystem and I didnt see any support there yet, even basic support >> like there is with ezjail would be nice. >> >> > Zfs was left out because its over kill. Sparse image jails gives the same > protection at a 10th of the overhead. You didn't factor in slowness due to having a file-backed filesystem. While probably pretty low, it's definitely there and not good in an io heavy jail. Also, the host will have to mount a UFS based FS, and cache it so you're going to have increased memory usage. Ideal setup for an io intensive jaill(eg database) is to be bound to compressed ZFS file-system, not a sparse image located on such a setup. I'm not sure what overhead you're referring too. If it's hard to tie into your application, you are probably correct, but from a host perspective you are increasing overhead. There are advantages to sparse or raw file as well, it would be nice to have a choice. -- Adam Vande More