From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 22:33:33 -0400
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <f328a58b35da7672cd4cf698db974c9d@coraid.com>
In-Reply-To: <14ec7b180904161604s1588b5b8k91c5740aefd18f7@mail.gmail.com>
References: <49E78FA9.7080206@home.se>
	<cb781342a3d1ba6653c70ccfd0aa4d87@quanstro.net>
	<14ec7b180904161604s1588b5b8k91c5740aefd18f7@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] To virtualise cpu/fs/auth-servers, or not?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: df8b6980-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Thu Apr 16 19:08:23 EDT 2009, mirtchovski@gmail.com wrote:
> i still like to think of private namespaces as the ultimate
> virtualizer: your ns is your "virtual environment", the file server
> you're mounting is the  "hypervisor". i don't care that it doesn't
> simulate actual hardware like xen/qemu. after all, each has layers and
> layers of abstractions to get you from the hardware to a usable
> environment.

it breaks down when you realize that some resources (processes, memory)
are not part of a namespace.

- erik