>>>>> "em" == Evert Meulie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
em> OpenSolaris+ZFS+RAIDZ+VirtualBox.
I'm using snv b83 + ZFS-unredundant + 32bit CPU + VirtualBox.
It's stable, but not all the features like USB and RDP are working for
me. Also it is being actively developed, so that's good.
I'm planning to build a bigger one.
I cannot vouch for its memory- or cpu-efficiency. It is probably
fine, but mine is not a situation where I swapped it into the place of
another virtualization stack so I could compare the performance to a
system widely known to perform reasonably---you'll have to do that.
Also VirtualBox does not make easy certain things I'd like to be
doing, like bridged networking and importing virtual disks from ZVol's
instead of big files on ZFS filesystems. I think it's possible to do
these things, though.
stability is really perfect. I've had some problems running out of
host memory, and that's it.
While VirtualBox has ``flat'' and ``sparse'' image formats like
VMWare, the VMWare ``flat'' format is a pair of files, a small one
that points to the big one, and the bigger of the two files is a
headerless image you could mount on the host with lofiadm. The
VirtualBox ``flat'' images are single files and have headers on them.
The headers are a round number of sectors. It's possible to mount
the images with Mac OS X hdiutil, but AFAIK not with lofiadm.
http://web.ivy.net/~carton/rant/virtualbox-macos-hdiutil.html
The ZFS snapshots are, for me, a lot faster (to merge/destroy), safer,
and more featureful (can make a tree with branches, not only a
straight line (VirtualBox) or a single snapshot (VMWare)) than the
ones built into VMWare Server, VMWare Fusion, or VirtualBox. not sure
how they compare to the serious >$0 VMWare stuff.
pgpAWeJpC80oT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
