Re: FreeBSD 10 prognostication...

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. 

Linux KVM has serious network issues, and overhead. (I use KVM a fair amount,
it's OK for testing, but when under load, KVM-based linux hosting sucks for
serious use)

If the goal is to get FreeBSD uber popular, then turn the alphas on to the jail
system. (or the pre-emptive swapping, or.. or..  or...) 

I don't believe it's about glitter as much as people say it is, at least,
not anymore.

I threw jails out there because I personally consider them to be the coolest
part of FreeBSD.

Jamie