On Fri, 5 Jun 2015 05:05:21 PM Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > > > Does this mean that btrfs is considered a second class option
> > >
> > > It is, for a few reasons.
> >
> > Sorry to persist with this but would you mind elaborating briefly on
> > some of those reasons or point me to further discussion p
Ok. I'm left scratching a little. When running under 0.9 (latest
code compiled from git) dash behaves in a weird way inside the
container. This behavior is non reproducable on 0.7. When doing the
same experiment using bash instead it does not reproduce so this is
application specific from what
Hi Jonathan,
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 11:23:05AM -0400, Gregoire, Jonathan (520851) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does anybody knows how to get the veth interface(s) linked to an LXD
> container. I'm able to get it in LXC but not in LXD.
It turns out this isn't possible right now. However, it seems like a
re
Quoting S.Çağlar Onur (cag...@10ur.org):
> Hey Serge,
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:29 AM Serge Hallyn
> wrote:
>
> > What i described was in lxc (i.e. lxc-start), not lxd (i.e. lxc launch).
> >
> > In lxd, if my understanding of how golang handles map range is correct,
> > then devices coming f
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:20 AM, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Robert Pendell (shi...@elite-systems.org):
>> As per my ticket on githib LXCFS fails to generate an appropriate
>> /proc/meminfo for container use in the event that the cgroup memory
>> controller is unavailable. This may be either be
Hey Serge,
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:29 AM Serge Hallyn
wrote:
> What i described was in lxc (i.e. lxc-start), not lxd (i.e. lxc launch).
>
> In lxd, if my understanding of how golang handles map range is correct,
> then devices coming from a profile should be applied first (in the order
> in wh
Using lxd, If I put both nics in the same profile that is applied, I still
experience random order. (eth0 <-> eth1)
___
lxc-users mailing list
lxc-users@lists.linuxcontainers.org
http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users
Quoting Mark Constable (ma...@renta.net):
> On Fri, 5 Jun 2015 03:54:06 PM Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > > Does this mean that btrfs is considered a second class option
> > > with the primary focus and most of your future lxd backing
> > > store effort being put into LVM?
> >
> > It is, for a few reason
On Fri, 5 Jun 2015 03:54:06 PM Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > Does this mean that btrfs is considered a second class option
> > with the primary focus and most of your future lxd backing
> > store effort being put into LVM?
>
> It is, for a few reasons.
Sorry to persist with this but would you mind elab
Quoting Mark Constable (ma...@renta.net):
> On Fri, 5 Jun 2015 07:58:02 AM Tycho Andersen wrote:
> > LVM support is Coming Soon, and making it fast and stable
> > will likely be a primary focus.
>
> On Fri, 5 Jun 2015 01:57:34 PM Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > What will become the recommended backing sto
On Sat, Jun 06, 2015 at 12:32:07AM +0900, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> On 2015-06-06 00:19, Tycho Andersen wrote:
>
> >># ls -l /var/lib/lxd
> >>lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Jun 5 10:15 /var/lib/lxd -> /srv/lxd
> >
> >Ah, my best guess is that lxd doesn't follow the symlink correctly
> >when detecting
On 2015-06-06 00:19, Tycho Andersen wrote:
# ls -l /var/lib/lxd
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Jun 5 10:15 /var/lib/lxd -> /srv/lxd
Ah, my best guess is that lxd doesn't follow the symlink correctly
when detecting filesystems. Whatever the cause, if you file a bug
we'll fix it, thanks.
Can you po
Hi,
Does anybody knows how to get the veth interface(s) linked to an LXD container.
I'm able to get it in LXC but not in LXD.
In LXC:
jonathan@lxd01:~$ sudo lxc-info -n container1
Name: container1
State: RUNNING
PID:7160
IP: 10.0.3.142
CPU use:
On Sat, Jun 06, 2015 at 12:11:27AM +0900, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> On 2015-06-06 00:00, Tycho Andersen wrote:
>
> >>As I've checked, this is not the case (the container is created in a
> >>directory, not in btrfs subvolume; lxc-create -B btrfs creates it in a
> >>subvolume).
> >
> >Can you file
On 2015-06-06 00:00, Tycho Andersen wrote:
As I've checked, this is not the case (the container is created in a
directory, not in btrfs subvolume; lxc-create -B btrfs creates it in a
subvolume).
Can you file a bug with info to reproduce? It should work as of 0.8.
Before I file a bug report -
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 11:36:37PM +0900, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> On 2015-06-05 22:58, Tycho Andersen wrote:
> >Hi Tomasz,
> >
> >On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 07:22:25PM +0900, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> >>Is there a "-B btrfs" equivalent in lxd?
> >
> >Yes, if you mount /var/lib/lxd as a btrfs sub
On 2015-06-05 22:58, Tycho Andersen wrote:
Hi Tomasz,
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 07:22:25PM +0900, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Is there a "-B btrfs" equivalent in lxd?
Yes, if you mount /var/lib/lxd as a btrfs subvolume, it should Just
Work.
As I've checked, this is not the case (the container i
On Fri, 5 Jun 2015 07:58:02 AM Tycho Andersen wrote:
> LVM support is Coming Soon, and making it fast and stable
> will likely be a primary focus.
On Fri, 5 Jun 2015 01:57:34 PM Serge Hallyn wrote:
> What will become the recommended backing store is actualy
> not yet implemented, but will be soon
Hi Tomasz,
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 07:22:25PM +0900, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> Is there a "-B btrfs" equivalent in lxd?
Yes, if you mount /var/lib/lxd as a btrfs subvolume, it should Just
Work.
> For example, with lxc, I would use:
>
> # lxc-create --template download --name test-container -B
Lxd will not be as flexible as lxc in many ways, including with
respect to backing stores.
What will become the recommended backing store is actualy not yet
implemented, but will be soon - that is lvm with thinpools. You'll
be able to either provide a vg with the default name, or specify a
custom
Is there a "-B btrfs" equivalent in lxd?
For example, with lxc, I would use:
# lxc-create --template download --name test-container -B btrfs
-B backingstore
'backingstore' is one of 'dir', 'lvm', 'loop',
'btrfs', 'zfs', or 'best'. The default is 'dir', meaning that th
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 01:44:03PM +1000, Mark Constable wrote:
> What is the status of redistribution rights for the LXD logo?
>
> I want to start a series of blog posts about my experiences with LXD
> so the current logo would be nice to re-use but I don't want Canonical
> lawyers, or anyone, to
22 matches
Mail list logo
