On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 11:47 +0900, Magnus Damm wrote: > On Fri, 2006-08-18 at 07:45 -0700, Dave Hansen 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. > > This could of course be solved with one LRU per container, which is how > the CKRM memory controller implemented things about a year ago.
Effectively Andrew's idea of faking up nodes is also giving per container LRUs. -rohit ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
