Attila Nagy writes:
> > > Would it be possible to solve this under FreeBSD?
> > I am second for it.
> I hope somebody will enlighten my dark mind, because I am really curious
> about this :)
>
> > I am using some partition "magic" and know dark side of it.
> What the problem is with it besides the ugly hacking and the small number
> of possible partitions?
How much partitions do you want?
adNs[0..30][a..h] 31*8= 248
if it is low enough, just use vn[0..]s[0..30][a..h]
... with some more dark sides, of cause
About dark side:
0garkin~(4)#df
Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Avail Capacity Mounted on
...
/dev/ad0s2h 7993324 461995 6891864 6% /usr
....
/dev/ad0s3a 7993324 441159 6912700 6% /jail/pent/usr
....
There is physically the same fs marked as /dev/ad0s2h and /dev/ad0s3a
in this example.
The /usr is rw mounted and /jail/pent/usr is ro mounted.
Do you see a difference?
You can really stuck VM system with ro mount that
is really rw mount in another mount.
Instances of shared fs do not share buffers - which IS
a real point - just allow second mount does not solve
a problem IMHO
The only way of use this method of fs sharing
in production is ro mount of any instance and
do not upgrade without all jails stopped. And
a lot of memory for files buffers :-(
--
@BABOLO http://links.ru/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message