From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail6.bemta8.messagelabs.com (mail6.bemta8.messagelabs.com [216.82.243.55]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB8C16B004A for ; Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:12:07 -0400 (EDT) Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [RFC] non-preemptible kernel socket for RAMster Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:12:04 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <4232c4b6-15be-42d8-be42-6e27f9188ce2@default> <6147447c-ecab-43ea-9b4a-1ff64b2089f0@default> <704d094e-7b81-480f-8363-327218d1b0ea@default D3F292ADF945FB49B35E96C94C2061B91257DCA8@nsmail.netscout.com> From: "Loke, Chetan" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Dan Magenheimer , netdev@vger.kernel.org Cc: Konrad Wilk , linux-mm > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Magenheimer [mailto:dan.magenheimer@oracle.com] > Sent: July 05, 2011 9:06 PM > To: Loke, Chetan; netdev@vger.kernel.org > Cc: Konrad Wilk; linux-mm > Subject: RE: [RFC] non-preemptible kernel socket for RAMster >=20 > > From: Loke, Chetan [mailto:Chetan.Loke@netscout.com] > > Subject: RE: [RFC] non-preemptible kernel socket for RAMster > > > > > From: Dan Magenheimer [mailto:dan.magenheimer@oracle.com] >=20 > > How often are you going to re-size your remote-SWAP? >=20 > is "as often as the working set changes on any machine in the > cluster", meaning *constantly*, entirely dynamically! How > about a more specific example: Suppose you have 2 machines, > each with 8GB of memory. 99% of the time each machine is > chugging along just fine and doesn't really need more than 4GB, > and may even use less than 1GB a large part of the time. > But very now and then, one of the machines randomly needs > 9GB, 10GB, maybe even 12GB of memory. This would normally > result in swapping. (Most system administrators won't even > have this much information... they'll just know they are > seeing swapping and decide they need to buy more RAM.) >=20 Ok, I understand there is interest in implementing 'remote-volatile-ballooning-variant' but how do you pick a remote candidate(hypervisor)? Let's say, memory could be available on remote system but what if the remote-p{NIC,CPU} is overloaded? Sure, sysadmins won't have this info because this so dynamic(and it's quite possible as you mentioned above). But does the trans-remote-API know about this resource-availability before opening a remote-channel? Stressing the remote-p{NIC/CPU} might trick hypervisor-vmotion-plugin to vmotion VM[s] to another hypervisor. How is trans-remote-API integrating with remote/global vmotion policies to avoid this false vmotion? > Dan Chetan Loke -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org