[nycbug-talk] 5.4 Jails, nullfs or unionfs?

[Isaac Levy]

Hi Charles,

On Apr 18, 2005, at 11:48 PM, Charles Sprickman wrote:

> After reading many threads like this:
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=111002874200001&r=1&w=2
>
> I'm lost as to what works and what doesn't.

Yikes- all I can say is, FreeBSD 4.8 forever!  Woohoo!  ;)

>
> In 5.x, nullfs in a jail is 10x slower than a standard mount or 
> unionfs. That's quite a performance hit.
>
> But everyone keeps saying unionfs is not stable for production use.

The thread above is confusing me- are either unionfs or nullfs stable 
for production use on FreeBSD 5.3 in the first place?

>
> What's a jailer to do?

Based on this part of the thread, I don't believe this is a 
jail-specific issue at all:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=freebsd-current&m=111045636907432&w=2

 > However, unionfs no longer works quite as
 > well in 5.X or -CURRENT.  There are several reasons for this:
 > 1. Nobody seems to have both the time and interest to maintain it.
 >
 > 2. Developers can't be expected to prevent regressions in
 >    something that's unsupported.
 >
 > 3. There are a couple of people who always respond to questions
 >    about unionfs with comments along the lines of:
 >    ``It's broken, so we won't help you.  Go away and don't tell
 >    us if you find any bugs.''

> What do you folks use under 5.x?

With that, what exactly are you trying to accomplish with nullfs or 
unionfs specific to a jail?  I may be able to toss in a different 
solution(?)

All the filesystem mounts in 5.x are different- I'm not sure what's 
inside and outside of stable any more, except now fundamental things in 
5.x, like devfs and procfs...

>
> Thanks,
>
> Charles

Rocket-
.ike