On 22 July 2010 02:16, Adam Vande More <amvandem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Aiza <aiz...@comclark.com> 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. > > even better when we get zfs v22 as we will have dedup. THat has its own memory issues though. > 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 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
