[Lxc-users] IPC between containers

[Nirmal Guhan]

On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Brian K. White <brian at aljex.com> wrote:

> On 6/7/2010 7:51 PM, Nirmal Guhan wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is there a way to use shared memory between the containers? Any other
> > better/faster IPC mechanisms? I don't want to use sockets.
> >
> > Please let me know.
>
> Fifos on shared filesystem on the host?
> Multiply hardlinked files on the host which appear in the same place in
> each container?
>
> Except I don't know how you could safely allow more than one client
> mount the fs except read-only, other than by means which are ultimately
> sockets just with fs overhead on top of that. (various network and
> distributed filesystems, and distributed ipc, distributed locking
> systems, all are network based)
>
> Or if the multiple-hardlink idea doesn't actually work, I guess you
> could put an incron job on the host which has access to all the
> container's fs's and can watch a special directory in the same place in
> all containers fs's and whenever a file is modified in one container,
> incrond on the host notices and replicates it in all other containers.
>
> None of this sounds as good as ordinary socket communications, which is
> my point.
>
> The whole point of a container is to ensure that exactly that (IPC)
> can't happen so I am tempted to say if you don't want something which
> contains, then don't use containers.
>
> --
> bkw
>
>
I would prefer using the RAM for performance, something like /dev/shm. I
tried mounting /dev/shm of host on container using mount --bind and it
works. I don't know if this is preferable though. Is there a similar
implementation(to /dev/shm) that is more secure and can be used across
containers? Or anything on the cards?

--Nirmal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/pipermail/lxc-users/attachments/20100607/698669ad/attachment.html>