| 1 |
On Thursday, April 23, 2015 11:03:53 PM lee wrote: |
| 2 |
> "J. Roeleveld" <joost@××××××××.org> writes: |
| 3 |
> > On 8 April 2015 14:43:02 GMT-07:00, lee <lee@××××××××.de> wrote: |
| 4 |
> >>hydra <hydrapolic@×××××.com> writes: |
| 5 |
> >>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 3:20 PM, lee <lee@××××××××.de> wrote: |
| 6 |
> >>>> symack <symack@×××××.com> writes: |
| 7 |
> >>>> |
| 8 |
> >>>> Other than that, unless you really do need full virtualization: I'm |
| 9 |
> >>>> finding Linux containers to be far more manageable than virtual |
| 10 |
> >>>> machines, and much more efficient. |
| 11 |
> >>> |
| 12 |
> >>> Can you please post some more details? |
| 13 |
> >> |
| 14 |
> >>About containers? |
| 15 |
> >> |
| 16 |
> >>There's very useful documentation about them like |
| 17 |
> >>https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/LXC ... |
| 18 |
> >> |
| 19 |
> >>What can I say? Virtualization with xen is like juggling with a set of |
| 20 |
> >>black boxes each of which aren't exactly accessible; the |
| 21 |
> >>documentation sucks, it's hard work to get it running and likewise hard |
| 22 |
> >>to maintain. |
| 23 |
> >> |
| 24 |
> > I disagree. Been using Xen for over 10 years now and find it very easy to |
| 25 |
> > use. The documentation could be better on the Xen site itself, but there |
| 26 |
> > is plenty of decent documentation available via Google. |
| 27 |
> Then we just disagree about this. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Do you have anything that you find insufficiently documented or is too difficult? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> >>Virtualization with containers is basically as simple as running just |
| 32 |
> >>another daemon. |
| 33 |
> >> |
| 34 |
> > Not quite. I use virtualization to minimizer the physical hardware. Xen is |
| 35 |
> > easy for that. Containers are what chroot jails should have been. But |
| 36 |
> > there is no simple method to set these up when security isolation is your |
| 37 |
> > goal. |
| 38 |
> Containers or chroots? |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Containers. |
| 41 |
Chroots don't have much when it comes to isolation. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
> >>Which the "better" tool, or combination of tools is, depends on what |
| 44 |
> >>you |
| 45 |
> >>want to accomplish. You could use containers in a VM, too, or use |
| 46 |
> >>virtualbox along with containers to run the odd VMs that require full |
| 47 |
> >>virtualzation. |
| 48 |
> >> |
| 49 |
> > Virtualbox is nice for a quick test. I wouldn't use it for production. |
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
> Why not? |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
Several reasons: |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
1) I wouldn't trust a desktop application for a server |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
2) The overhead from Virtualbox is quite high (still better then VMWare's |
| 58 |
desktop versions though) |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
-- |
| 61 |
Joost |
Archives