> Robert Nix wrote: "But, if one image starts doing compiles or compression > of large quantities of data, or any other CPU bound task, everyone will > suffer." > > Actually you have a choice. If the compiles, etc. are relegated to a > compute server you can make it suffer rather than "everyone else", also, if > you cap the cpu given the guests you can minimize the intensity of t the > suffering when cpu heavy tasks occur, but it will go on for a longer period > of time. It's a matter of prioities and how you distribute work among > virtual machines. The beauty of Linux is that the "compute intense > server" can be a virtual or real machine, but it is still LInux. In > the past such a scheme using reeal machines would split the work between > ZOS and WIndows which is a lot more complex. We need to start thinking > about things like Grids of virtual and real servers.
I am curious. How does a high-end Intel or Athlon SMB system running Hercules shape up as a compute engine? And, how about if you run (does it run?) openmosix (www.openmosiz.org) on L/390 and use several boxes? -- Cheers John Summerfield Microsoft's most solid OS: http://www.geocities.com/rcwoolley/ Note: mail delivered to me is deemed to be intended for me, for my disposition. ============================== If you don't like being told you're wrong, be right!
