On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 09:40:56AM +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> 2013/11/11 Stefan Hajnoczi :
> > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:00:45AM +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> >> 2013/11/5 Stefan Hajnoczi :
> >> > I'd also like to see the thread pool implementation you wish to add
> >> > before we add a l
Il 05/12/2013 09:40, Matthias Brugger ha scritto:
> CFQ the state of the art I/O scheduler
The deadline scheduler typically provides much better performance for
server usage (including hosting VMs). It doesn't support some features
such as I/O throttling via cgroups, but QEMU now has a very good
2013/11/11 Stefan Hajnoczi :
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:00:45AM +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>> 2013/11/5 Stefan Hajnoczi :
>> > I'd also like to see the thread pool implementation you wish to add
>> > before we add a layer of indirection which has no users yet.
>>
>> Fair enough, I will evalua
Il 11/11/2013 19:32, Alex Bligh ha scritto:
>
> On 11 Nov 2013, at 18:01, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>> Il 11/11/2013 18:59, Alex Bligh ha scritto:
Why is it necessary to push this task down into the host? I don't
understand the advantage of this approach except that maybe it works
ar
On 11 Nov 2013, at 18:01, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 11/11/2013 18:59, Alex Bligh ha scritto:
>>> Why is it necessary to push this task down into the host? I don't
>>> understand the advantage of this approach except that maybe it works
>>> around certain misconfigurations, I/O scheduler quirks,
Il 11/11/2013 18:59, Alex Bligh ha scritto:
> > Why is it necessary to push this task down into the host? I don't
> > understand the advantage of this approach except that maybe it works
> > around certain misconfigurations, I/O scheduler quirks, or plain old
> > bugs - all of which should be inve
On 11 Nov 2013, at 12:43, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> Why is it necessary to push this task down into the host? I don't
> understand the advantage of this approach except that maybe it works
> around certain misconfigurations, I/O scheduler quirks, or plain old
> bugs - all of which should be inves
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:00:45AM +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> 2013/11/5 Stefan Hajnoczi :
> > I'd also like to see the thread pool implementation you wish to add
> > before we add a layer of indirection which has no users yet.
>
> Fair enough, I will evaluate if it will make more sense to im
2013/11/5 Stefan Hajnoczi :
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 11:28:41AM +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>> v2:
>> - fix issues found by checkpatch.pl
>> - change the descritpion of patch 3
>>
>> This patch series makes the thread pool implementation modular.
>> This allows each drive to use a special imp
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 11:28:41AM +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> v2:
> - fix issues found by checkpatch.pl
> - change the descritpion of patch 3
>
> This patch series makes the thread pool implementation modular.
> This allows each drive to use a special implementation.
> The patch series pre
v2:
- fix issues found by checkpatch.pl
- change the descritpion of patch 3
This patch series makes the thread pool implementation modular.
This allows each drive to use a special implementation.
The patch series prepares qemu to be able to include thread pools different to
the one actually impl
11 matches
Mail list logo
