Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 147: |
Line 147: |
| * Support for different storage types | | * Support for different storage types |
| | | |
− | == Disadvantages == <!--T:29-->
| + | == See also == <!--T:29--> |
− | * Boot delays in each container after some restarts or in system crashs due the multiple forced FSCKs when using ext3/4 file systems
| |
− | * Container's starts fails when FSCK find several inconsistencies in FS needing manual intervention
| |
− | * Increased risks of unrecoverable errors due container crashes
| |
− | * Greatly increased risks of unrecoverable errors when used over a NFS due network instabilities
| |
− | * Extra IO use when shrinking a PLOOP due block re-alocation [varies due FS fragmentation]
| |
− | * Slight poor performance due additional PLOOP layers
| |
− | * Needs a manually defrag and compact operations to recover hardnode free space wasted by allocated and no-more used blocks in each container
| |
− | * Additional space wasted due the additional FS metadata and format
| |
− | * No support for hardnode bind mounts to other disks (like backups) [can be workarounded using "loopback" NFS-like solutions to hardnode but looses some performance]
| |
− | | |
− | == See also == <!--T:30--> | |
| * [[Ploop]] | | * [[Ploop]] |
| </translate> | | </translate> |
| | | |
| [[Category: Storage]] | | [[Category: Storage]] |