On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Juan M. Mendez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm interested Ron, Any change to thnx to get it working with new lguest?
have not tested with full up thnx yet. I am going to pull down a
release 2.6.25 and make sure it still works with that.
oh yes, to install lguest, you MUST:
modprobe lg syscall_vector=64
This sets the right syscall vector.
ron
Disk IO is not great, net IO seems pretty good. I don't have a stable
timebase on lguest, evidently, or I would run netpipe to test.
just put it up on a tee: why not use aoe?
- erik
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 4:22 PM, erik quanstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
just put it up on a tee: why not use aoe?
I had not even thought of that. How do you recommend setting it up?
ron
just put it up on a tee: why not use aoe?
I had not even thought of that. How do you recommend setting it up?
ron
i probablly don't know enough about your setup to answer that well.
but here;s an idea nonetheless.
for a single-machine linux-hosted setup, you could run linux vblade
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 7:29 PM, erik quanstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
just put it up on a tee: why not use aoe?
The problems of disk I/O are largely a focus issue -- all this stuff
is pretty new and they focused on the network mechanisms first because
those were the ones where
You on the wrong portion of the problem -- the disk solution they have
is effectively AOV (ATA over Virtio), you aren't going to do better by
putting a virtual network driver in between. They just have to tune
their userspace gateway for disk access -- they put a lot of work into
making the
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 7:53 PM, erik quanstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
what i'm saying is boils down to 10ms + 100ns is essentially 10ms.
so it's slower, but at a level a couple (or three) orders of magnitude too
low to be very significant.
ah, but its not always 10ms because of the
