On 12-11-16 03:02 AM, Jim Klimov wrote:
On 2012-11-15 21:43, Geoff Nordli wrote:
Instead of using vdi, I use comstar targets and then use vbox built-in
Out of curiosity: in this case are there any devices whose ownership
might get similarly botched, or you've tested that this approach also
works well for non-root VMs?
Did you measure any overheads of initiator-target vs. zvol, both being
on the local system? Is there any significant performance difference
worth thinking and talking about?
This works for non-root VMs.
I haven't measured the difference between them, but it has been working
fine. These aren't high-performance VMs. The design was to replicate
the entire infrastructure for a small office every night to an off-site
location. I have two of these in production right now and it has been
working really well.
I still need to work on some scripts to on the fly rebuild the VMs. One
thing that I have done in the past is store the LUN and LU GUID in the
zfs user defined properties to keep track of it. I love zfs user
defined properties, they are one of the killer features of ZFS. Really,
no reason to not be able to store the entire VM configuration as zfs
properties. That could be interesting with your vboxsvc smf project.
I work for another company that uses vbox for a lab management solution
for education. We use the same architecture (vbox iscsi initiator -
comstar target) but separate out the virtual machines from the storage.
It is a very slick system.
have a great day!
zfs-discuss mailing list