Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Linda Kateley]

If I remember correctly it's a max, not a guarantee.

lk


On 1/11/17 8:15 PM, Mini Trader wrote:

Seems like I am confusing you

I do realize that it is in BITS!

4M == 4000KBIT == 500kbytes.

Using 4000K OR 4M SHOULD restrict flow to a MAXIMUM of 500 KBYTES.  
What I am seeing is that using a value restricts flow to a maximum of 
100KBYTES!



root@storage1:/root# flowadm add-flow -l backup0 -a transport=tcp tcpflow
root@storage1:/root# flowadm set-flowprop -p maxbw=4M tcpflow

ubuntu-16.04.1-desk   0%[  ]   2.67M 104KB/s   eta 
3h 45m


# Well gosh darnit.  That doesn't make sense.  Maybe his adapter cant 
download more than 100KBYTES.  Lets undo what we did and see what happens.


root@storage1:/root# flowadm remove-flow -l backup0
desktop-amd64.iso?_   1%[  ]  18.24M  1.00MB/s   
eta 85m 54s


# It appears our download speed is running at 8 MEGABIT or 1MEGABYTE 
without any flow.  So why would a restriction of half of our download 
rate cause it to run at 1/10th the maximum speed!



On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 8:52 PM, Dan McDonald > wrote:



> On Jan 11, 2017, at 8:32 PM, Mini Trader
> wrote:
>
> This does not work.  Simple example.  Ran wget on an ubuntu
ISO.  Was downloading at over 1 mega byte per sec. Set adapter to
4000K.  I would expect the download to peak at around 500 Kilo
Bytes.  Was in the 100 range.  16000K put it in the 500kb range. 
Doesn't add up.  Also didn't persist across reboot of zone.


1.) flowadm works in units of bits/sec, not bytes. 4000kbit ==
4mbit == 500kbytes.  Please RTFM carefully.

2.) Use it in the global zone for the NIC you're assigning. Then
it'll persist.  Persistence of /native commands in LX zones is an
open problem right now.  We aren't planning on doing it for
flowadm, only for ipadm.

Dan






___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss


___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Dan McDonald]

> On Jan 11, 2017, at 9:15 PM, Mini Trader  wrote:
> 
> Seems like I am confusing you
> 
> I do realize that it is in BITS!
> 
> 4M == 4000KBIT == 500kbytes.
> 
> Using 4000K OR 4M SHOULD restrict flow to a MAXIMUM of 500 KBYTES.  What I am 
> seeing is that using a value restricts flow to a maximum of 100KBYTES!

Sorry for being confused.

I'm a bit stumped at this point, though did I see that you're using vmxnet3 on 
VMware?  I will say that when these features were brought up, they assumed a 
vNIC over a physical NIC on metal.  I'm not sure if there's a bizarre 
interaction with vmxnet3 or not.

One other thing, and I'd have to consult a larger audience, I thought flowadm 
worked as low a units of 1Mbit/sec, but it could be units of 10Mbit/sec.  
(Flowadm was designed for GigE adapters...)  It's a function of the system's hz 
for bizarre reasons, and I'm wondering if being on VMware affects those or not.

You can mess with this if you wish:

https://blogs.oracle.com/jtc/entry/overhead_in_increasing_the_solaris

Dan

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Mini Trader]

Seems like I am confusing you

I do realize that it is in BITS!

4M == 4000KBIT == 500kbytes.

Using 4000K OR 4M SHOULD restrict flow to a MAXIMUM of 500 KBYTES.  What I
am seeing is that using a value restricts flow to a maximum of 100KBYTES!


root@storage1:/root# flowadm add-flow -l backup0 -a transport=tcp tcpflow
root@storage1:/root# flowadm set-flowprop -p maxbw=4M tcpflow

ubuntu-16.04.1-desk   0%[  ]   2.67M   104KB/s   eta 3h
45m

# Well gosh darnit.  That doesn't make sense.  Maybe his adapter cant
download more than 100KBYTES.  Lets undo what we did and see what happens.

root@storage1:/root# flowadm remove-flow -l backup0
desktop-amd64.iso?_   1%[  ]  18.24M  1.00MB/s   eta
85m 54s

# It appears our download speed is running at 8 MEGABIT or 1MEGABYTE
without any flow.  So why would a restriction of half of our download rate
cause it to run at 1/10th the maximum speed!


On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 8:52 PM, Dan McDonald  wrote:

>
> > On Jan 11, 2017, at 8:32 PM, Mini Trader 
> wrote:
> >
> > This does not work.  Simple example.  Ran wget on an ubuntu ISO.  Was
> downloading at over 1 mega byte per sec.  Set adapter to 4000K.  I would
> expect the download to peak at around 500 Kilo Bytes.  Was in the 100
> range.  16000K put it in the 500kb range.  Doesn't add up.  Also didn't
> persist across reboot of zone.
>
> 1.) flowadm works in units of bits/sec, not bytes.  4000kbit == 4mbit ==
> 500kbytes.  Please RTFM carefully.
>
> 2.) Use it in the global zone for the NIC you're assigning.  Then it'll
> persist.  Persistence of /native commands in LX zones is an open problem
> right now.  We aren't planning on doing it for flowadm, only for ipadm.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
>
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Ergi Thanasko]

We were using  flowadm on a source ip basis. Not easy to keep track of the ip 
in a big product environment  and also want to throttle in or out and the 
bidirectional was not clean way of doing it 



> On Jan 11, 2017, at 5:28 PM, Dan McDonald  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Jan 11, 2017, at 8:25 PM, Mini Trader  wrote:
>> 
>> Is it possible to limit flow control on uploads?  flowadm - the numbers 
>> don't seem to add up.  I'm not sure what its doing.
> 
> From the manual:
> 
>   maxbw
> 
>   Sets the full duplex bandwidth for the flow. The bandwidth is
>   specified as an integer with one of the scale suffixes(K, M, or G
>   for Kbps, Mbps, and Gbps). If no units are specified, the input
>   value will be read as Mbps. The default is no bandwidth limit.
> 
> Flowadm bandwidth is bidirectional.  You can, though, limit uploads based on 
> port number.  See the examples section for https, e.g.
> 
> Dan
> 
> ___
> OmniOS-discuss mailing list
> OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
> http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Mini Trader]

This does not work.  Simple example.  Ran wget on an ubuntu ISO.  Was
downloading at over 1 mega byte per sec.  Set adapter to 4000K.  I would
expect the download to peak at around 500 Kilo Bytes.  Was in the 100
range.  16000K put it in the 500kb range.  Doesn't add up.  Also didn't
persist across reboot of zone.

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 8:28 PM, Dan McDonald  wrote:

>
> > On Jan 11, 2017, at 8:25 PM, Mini Trader 
> wrote:
> >
> > Is it possible to limit flow control on uploads?  flowadm - the numbers
> don't seem to add up.  I'm not sure what its doing.
>
> From the manual:
>
>maxbw
>
>Sets the full duplex bandwidth for the flow. The bandwidth is
>specified as an integer with one of the scale suffixes(K, M, or
> G
>for Kbps, Mbps, and Gbps). If no units are specified, the input
>value will be read as Mbps. The default is no bandwidth limit.
>
> Flowadm bandwidth is bidirectional.  You can, though, limit uploads based
> on port number.  See the examples section for https, e.g.
>
> Dan
>
>
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Dan McDonald]

> On Jan 11, 2017, at 8:25 PM, Mini Trader  wrote:
> 
> Is it possible to limit flow control on uploads?  flowadm - the numbers don't 
> seem to add up.  I'm not sure what its doing.

>From the manual:

   maxbw

   Sets the full duplex bandwidth for the flow. The bandwidth is
   specified as an integer with one of the scale suffixes(K, M, or G
   for Kbps, Mbps, and Gbps). If no units are specified, the input
   value will be read as Mbps. The default is no bandwidth limit.

Flowadm bandwidth is bidirectional.  You can, though, limit uploads based on 
port number.  See the examples section for https, e.g.

Dan

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Mini Trader]

Is it possible to limit flow control on uploads?  flowadm - the numbers
don't seem to add up.  I'm not sure what its doing.

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Dan McDonald  wrote:

>
> > On Jan 11, 2017, at 8:15 PM, Mini Trader 
> wrote:
> >
> > The values set in flowadm seem odd.  They don't align with download
> speed.  Also it is up and down not up or down.
> >
> > wondershaper does not work.
>
> It won't because it expects kernel interfaces LX zones don't provide.
>
> You will have to use /native/ tools for things like this.
>
> Sorry,
> Dan
>
>
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Dan McDonald]

> On Jan 11, 2017, at 8:15 PM, Mini Trader  wrote:
> 
> The values set in flowadm seem odd.  They don't align with download speed.  
> Also it is up and down not up or down.
> 
> wondershaper does not work.

It won't because it expects kernel interfaces LX zones don't provide.

You will have to use /native/ tools for things like this.

Sorry,
Dan

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Mini Trader]

The values set in flowadm seem odd.  They don't align with download speed.
Also it is up and down not up or down.

wondershaper does not work.

root@debian-8:~# wondershaper backup0 4000 4000
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
We have an error talking to the kernel
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
We have an error talking to the kernel
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
We have an error talking to the kernel
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
We have an error talking to the kernel
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
We have an error talking to the kernel
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
RTNETLINK answers: Unknown error -122
We have an error talking to the kernel


On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Jim Klimov  wrote:

> 12 января 2017 г. 0:13:39 CET, Mini Trader 
> пишет:
> >Is it possible for me to add inputs into the interface config for my
> >adapters.
> >
> >I use a utility to restrict uplink speed called wondershaper.
> >
> >Normally my /etc/network/interfaces has something like:
> >
> >up /sbin/wondershaper eth0 X Y
> >
> >Would like to do the same if possible in the zone config.
> >
> >On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:56 PM Dan McDonald  wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > On Jan 11, 2017, at 5:04 AM, Andy Fiddaman 
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> > Will we still be able to to configure the networking under zonecfg?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > Basically what I'm asking is can we stop our zones from being able
> >to
> >> change
> >>
> >> > their IP address?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> That's a different question, and the answer is going to be no going
> >> forward, as it is no today.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I have LX zones using zonecfg(1M) to set DHCP.  I can go in as
> >root@lx-zone
> >> and use /native/sbin/{ifconfig,route} to take it over.  I don't know
> >off
> >> the top of my head if SmartOS restricts things this way, but OmniOS
> >does
> >> not.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Dan
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >>
> >> OmniOS-discuss mailing list
> >>
> >> OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
> >>
> >> http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss
> >>
> >>
>
> I am not sure about a direct answer here, but you probably can fiddle with
> dladm, flowadm, etc. on the illumos host side to limit the capabilities of
> the vnic you delegate into the zone.
> --
> Typos courtesy of K-9 Mail on my Samsung Android
>
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Jim Klimov]

12 января 2017 г. 0:13:39 CET, Mini Trader  пишет:
>Is it possible for me to add inputs into the interface config for my
>adapters.
>
>I use a utility to restrict uplink speed called wondershaper.
>
>Normally my /etc/network/interfaces has something like:
>
>up /sbin/wondershaper eth0 X Y
>
>Would like to do the same if possible in the zone config.
>
>On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:56 PM Dan McDonald  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> > On Jan 11, 2017, at 5:04 AM, Andy Fiddaman 
>wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Will we still be able to to configure the networking under zonecfg?
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>
>>
>> > Basically what I'm asking is can we stop our zones from being able
>to
>> change
>>
>> > their IP address?
>>
>>
>>
>> That's a different question, and the answer is going to be no going
>> forward, as it is no today.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have LX zones using zonecfg(1M) to set DHCP.  I can go in as
>root@lx-zone
>> and use /native/sbin/{ifconfig,route} to take it over.  I don't know
>off
>> the top of my head if SmartOS restricts things this way, but OmniOS
>does
>> not.
>>
>>
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>>
>> OmniOS-discuss mailing list
>>
>> OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
>>
>> http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss
>>
>>

I am not sure about a direct answer here, but you probably can fiddle with 
dladm, flowadm, etc. on the illumos host side to limit the capabilities of the 
vnic you delegate into the zone. 
--
Typos courtesy of K-9 Mail on my Samsung Android
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Dale Ghent]

No, it doesn't work that way. The LX brand compatibility layer makes hardware 
primitives such as interfaces *look* like what a linux program would expect, 
but not necessarily act like one, and that extends to configuring it as well.

/dale

> On Jan 11, 2017, at 6:13 PM, Mini Trader  wrote:
> 
> Is it possible for me to add inputs into the interface config for my 
> adapters. 
> 
> I use a utility to restrict uplink speed called wondershaper. 
> 
> Normally my /etc/network/interfaces has something like:
> 
> up /sbin/wondershaper eth0 X Y
> 
> Would like to do the same if possible in the zone config. 
> 
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:56 PM Dan McDonald  wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Jan 11, 2017, at 5:04 AM, Andy Fiddaman  wrote:
> 
> >
> 
> > Will we still be able to to configure the networking under zonecfg?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> 
> 
> > Basically what I'm asking is can we stop our zones from being able to change
> 
> > their IP address?
> 
> 
> 
> That's a different question, and the answer is going to be no going forward, 
> as it is no today.
> 
> 
> 
> I have LX zones using zonecfg(1M) to set DHCP.  I can go in as root@lx-zone 
> and use /native/sbin/{ifconfig,route} to take it over.  I don't know off the 
> top of my head if SmartOS restricts things this way, but OmniOS does not.
> 
> 
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 
> OmniOS-discuss mailing list
> 
> OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
> 
> http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss
> 
> ___
> OmniOS-discuss mailing list
> OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
> http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Dan McDonald]

> On Jan 11, 2017, at 5:04 AM, Andy Fiddaman  wrote:
> 
> Will we still be able to to configure the networking under zonecfg?

Yes.

> Basically what I'm asking is can we stop our zones from being able to change
> their IP address?

That's a different question, and the answer is going to be no going forward, as 
it is no today.

I have LX zones using zonecfg(1M) to set DHCP.  I can go in as root@lx-zone and 
use /native/sbin/{ifconfig,route} to take it over.  I don't know off the top of 
my head if SmartOS restricts things this way, but OmniOS does not.

Dan

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Dale Ghent]

If you are referring to things like VT-d, then no. VT-d is not relevant to this 
sort of virtualization and would provide no direct benefit to it. 

LX zones are quite literally a Linux kernel syscall compatibility/translation 
layer on top of the running illumos kernel. This layer is what takes syscalls 
from Linux apps/libc running inside a LX zone and either directly calls the 
corresponding illumos syscall if there's no difference between the two, or does 
what is needed to provide Linux semantics in the results if there isn't.

/dale

> On Jan 11, 2017, at 11:36 AM, Mini Trader  wrote:
> 
> If the hardware is there will it be used?
> 
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:33 AM Nahum Shalman  wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Mini Trader  
> wrote:
> With respect to virtualization, should one be turning on any hardware 
> specific feature for the VM to properly use LX or it doesn't matter?
> 
> LX doesn't require hardware virtualization support. LX zones are like other 
> zones except that they use an emulated Linux system call table instead of a 
> native illumos system call table.
> No actual Linux kernel is used so there's no need for the hardware 
> shenanigans (and their associated performance costs) to trick Linux into 
> thinking it's on hardware.
> 
> -Nahum
> ___
> OmniOS-discuss mailing list
> OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
> http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Mini Trader]

If the hardware is there will it be used?

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:33 AM Nahum Shalman  wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Mini Trader 
> wrote:
>
> With respect to virtualization, should one be turning on any hardware
> specific feature for the VM to properly use LX or it doesn't matter?
>
>
> LX doesn't require hardware virtualization support. LX zones are like
> other zones except that they use an emulated Linux system call table
> instead of a native illumos system call table.
> No actual Linux kernel is used so there's no need for the hardware
> shenanigans (and their associated performance costs) to trick Linux into
> thinking it's on hardware.
>
> -Nahum
>
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Nahum Shalman]

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Mini Trader 
wrote:

> With respect to virtualization, should one be turning on any hardware
> specific feature for the VM to properly use LX or it doesn't matter?
>

LX doesn't require hardware virtualization support. LX zones are like other
zones except that they use an emulated Linux system call table instead of a
native illumos system call table.
No actual Linux kernel is used so there's no need for the hardware
shenanigans (and their associated performance costs) to trick Linux into
thinking it's on hardware.

-Nahum
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Mini Trader]

With respect to virtualization, should one be turning on any hardware
specific feature for the VM to properly use LX or it doesn't matter?

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 9:35 AM Nahum Shalman  wrote:

> At this phase I would honestly recommend attempting to reproduce LX issues
> on the latest SmartOS and reporting them to Joyent.
> Anything that manifests on OmniOS but not SmartOS would be an indication
> that there's something we could pull over from SmartOS to fix on OmniOS.
>
> Chrome and Chromium I'm confident are still broken on SmartOS too. I think
> it uses namespace and/or cgroup functionality for sandboxing that have not
> been implemented in LX yet.
>
> I seem to recall Firefox mostly working the last time I tried, for
> whatever that's worth.
>
> -Nahum
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Tobias Oetiker  wrote:
>
> On 11 Jan, 2017, at 00:03, Dan McDonald dan...@omniti.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Given how encompassing the 022 work is, don't hold your breath.  If
> there are
>
>
> > real, provable show-stoppers in LX, fixes may get backported.
>
>
>
>
>
> We have setup ThinLinc (www.cendio.com) in an ubuntu 16.04 lx zone ...
>
>
>
>
>
> ThinLinc is a sunray like environment with very fast vnc based
> software-thin-clients ...
>
>
> the setup works great on lx and is VERY fast, compared to
>
>
> doing the same thing in kvm ...
>
>
>
>
>
> the only 'show-stopper' for us is that chrome (and chromium) crash pretty
>
>
> much instantly after launch ...
>
>
>
>
>
> so I would be quite interesting on how to report lx issues ... (and yes we
> do have a omniti support contract).
>
>
>
>
>
> cheers
>
>
> tobi
>
>
> ___
>
>
> OmniOS-discuss mailing list
>
>
> OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
>
>
> http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
>
> OmniOS-discuss mailing list
>
> OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
>
> http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss
>
>
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Tobias Oetiker]

On 11 Jan, 2017, at 00:03, Dan McDonald dan...@omniti.com wrote:

> Given how encompassing the 022 work is, don't hold your breath.  If there are
> real, provable show-stoppers in LX, fixes may get backported.

We have setup ThinLinc (www.cendio.com) in an ubuntu 16.04 lx zone ... 

ThinLinc is a sunray like environment with very fast vnc based 
software-thin-clients ... 
the setup works great on lx and is VERY fast, compared to
doing the same thing in kvm ... 

the only 'show-stopper' for us is that chrome (and chromium) crash pretty
much instantly after launch ...

so I would be quite interesting on how to report lx issues ... (and yes we do 
have a omniti support contract).

cheers
tobi
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Dan McDonald]

> On Jan 10, 2017, at 6:50 PM, Mini Trader  wrote:
> 
> No Python 3.x ?

Baby steps...

Plus, the changes for 3.x would be even larger than for 2.6->2.7.

Dan

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Mini Trader]

No Python 3.x ?

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:04 PM, Dale Ghent  wrote:

>
> > On Jan 10, 2017, at 5:04 PM, Dominik Hassler  wrote:
> >
> > @Dan: LX zones are considered BETA in r20 and r22 seems to be "late", is
> there a chance to get LX bleeding edge in r20 w/o the risk of breaking
> something else?
>
> Zones in 020 is still largely in sync with the LX code currently in bloody
> (021). Since zones (beta) was released with 020, we’ve been primarily
> focussed on other items required for 022, the most laborious of which is
> the Python 2.6 -> 2.7 upgrade. This is needed for a number of reasons.
> First, the benefits of getting off of 2.6 and on to 2.7 is
> self-explanatory, but 2.7 is also needed for being able to stay in sync
> with the pkg code, as well as the next big project for 022 - a
> loader-enabled installer (text installer and kayak) to replace the current
> one.
>
> In the mean-time, we’re always looking for ideas (and even contributions!)
> from the community on how best to handle the management and administrivia
> involved with LX zones. For now, we’d like this to stay within the realm of
> zoneadm/zonecfg and family.
>
> /dale
>
> ___
> OmniOS-discuss mailing list
> OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
> http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss
>
>
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Dominik Hassler]

Dale,

I am very satisfied to stay in the realm of zoneadm/zonecfg and family. 
This is what I wanted to read:


On 01/11/2017 12:03 AM, Dan McDonald wrote:
>  If there are real, provable show-stoppers in LX, fixes may get 
backported.


Cheers,
Dom



On 01/11/2017 12:04 AM, Dale Ghent wrote:



On Jan 10, 2017, at 5:04 PM, Dominik Hassler  wrote:

@Dan: LX zones are considered BETA in r20 and r22 seems to be "late", is there 
a chance to get LX bleeding edge in r20 w/o the risk of breaking something else?


Zones in 020 is still largely in sync with the LX code currently in bloody (021). 
Since zones (beta) was released with 020, we’ve been primarily focussed on other 
items required for 022, the most laborious of which is the Python 2.6 -> 2.7 
upgrade. This is needed for a number of reasons. First, the benefits of getting 
off of 2.6 and on to 2.7 is self-explanatory, but 2.7 is also needed for being 
able to stay in sync with the pkg code, as well as the next big project for 022 - 
a loader-enabled installer (text installer and kayak) to replace the current one.

In the mean-time, we’re always looking for ideas (and even contributions!) from 
the community on how best to handle the management and administrivia involved 
with LX zones. For now, we’d like this to stay within the realm of 
zoneadm/zonecfg and family.

/dale


___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Dale Ghent]

> On Jan 10, 2017, at 5:04 PM, Dominik Hassler  wrote:
> 
> @Dan: LX zones are considered BETA in r20 and r22 seems to be "late", is 
> there a chance to get LX bleeding edge in r20 w/o the risk of breaking 
> something else?

Zones in 020 is still largely in sync with the LX code currently in bloody 
(021). Since zones (beta) was released with 020, we’ve been primarily focussed 
on other items required for 022, the most laborious of which is the Python 2.6 
-> 2.7 upgrade. This is needed for a number of reasons. First, the benefits of 
getting off of 2.6 and on to 2.7 is self-explanatory, but 2.7 is also needed 
for being able to stay in sync with the pkg code, as well as the next big 
project for 022 - a loader-enabled installer (text installer and kayak) to 
replace the current one.

In the mean-time, we’re always looking for ideas (and even contributions!) from 
the community on how best to handle the management and administrivia involved 
with LX zones. For now, we’d like this to stay within the realm of 
zoneadm/zonecfg and family.

/dale


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

Re: [OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Dan McDonald]

> On Jan 10, 2017, at 5:04 PM, Dominik Hassler  wrote:
> 
> @Dan: LX zones are considered BETA in r20 and r22 seems to be "late", is 
> there a chance to get LX bleeding edge in r20 w/o the risk of breaking 
> something else?

Given how encompassing the 022 work is, don't hold your breath.  If there are 
real, provable show-stoppers in LX, fixes may get backported.  Also, the big 
other change for LX I want in 022 is ipadm(1M) being able to work in an LX 
zone, so you don't have to do zonecfg(1M) for your network configuration.

Dan

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss

[OmniOS-discuss] LX zones: configurations

[Dominik Hassler]

Hi,

I thought it might be good to have a public spreadsheet to post LX zone 
setups and how/if they work. It is not meant to be the book of wisdom, 
but should encourage people who are thinking of running the same 
service(s) in an LX zone, to actually try it if they see that someone 
else already did it before. Even if you plan to use a different distro, 
it might give you some confidence to step forward.


This is just a basic start. Feel free to reformat it, add missing 
columns etc... If it is found to be useful, ownership could be 
transferred to OmniTI and linked to the wiki (w/ additional information).


http://tinyurl.com/hajz4ap

@Dan: LX zones are considered BETA in r20 and r22 seems to be "late", is 
there a chance to get LX bleeding edge in r20 w/o the risk of breaking 
something else?

___
OmniOS-discuss mailing list
OmniOS-discuss@lists.omniti.com
http://lists.omniti.com/mailman/listinfo/omnios-discuss