Re: FreeBSD 10 prognostication...

2012/5/21 Jamie <[email protected]>

> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:57:33AM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav wrote:
> > No, they're not.  VMWare, RHEV (KVM-based) etc. provide features such as
> > seamless migration of virtual machines from one physical machine to
> > another, automatic restart on a different physical server if one fails
> > etc. that simply aren't possible with jails; and there are certain
> > things you still can't run reliably / safely in jails - anything that
> > relies on SysV IPC, for instance, such as PostgreSQL.
>
> True about the SysV, and I mostly agree about automatic failover.
>
> But I think the FreeBSD jail system is still the better model for how I
> see these things being used (certainly the better *potential*). But yea,
> not "quite" cloud.
>
> When coupled with something like rsync, they *almost* do the job. And for
> a lot
> of the current "VPS" applications, they do the job.
>
> But lets suppose you want proper redundancy and partitioned environments,
> so, you put FreeBSD on a cloud, but partition your environments into jails.
>
> Now you have a cheap, low overhead way of doing logical partitioning and
> you
> still have a "cloud" with redundancy.
>

That'd fine if you are not taking in account other characteristics that
make
clouds, well, clouds, like: on-demand self-service, resource
pooling, multi-tenancy
and rapid elasticity.


> (snip)
> I threw jails out there because I personally consider them to be the
> coolest
> part of FreeBSD.
>
>
Agreed that jails are cool and I would like very much to see a
FreeBSD-based
cloud implementation.
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"