On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 07:45:48 -0700 Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-08-18 at 12:08 +0400, Andrey Savochkin wrote: > > > > A) Have separate memory management for each container, > > with separate buddy allocator, lru lists, page replacement mechanism. > > That implies a considerable overhead, and the main challenge there > > is sharing of pages between these separate memory managers. > > Hold on here for just a sec... > > It is quite possible to do memory management aimed at one container > while that container's memory still participates in the main VM. > > There is overhead here, as the LRU scanning mechanisms get less > efficient, but I'd rather pay a penalty at LRU scanning time than divide > up the VM, or coarsely start failing allocations. > I have this mad idea that you can divide a 128GB machine up into 256 fake NUMA nodes, then you use each "node" as a 512MB unit of memory allocation. So that 4.5GB job would be placed within an exclusive cpuset which has nine "mems" (what are these called?) and voila: the job has a hard 4.5GB limit, no kernel changes needed. Unfortunately this is not testable because numa=fake=256 doesn't come even vaguely close to working. Am trying to get that fixed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ ckrm-tech mailing list https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
