Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
CCing Vserver and OpenVz lists.
BTW, can we add these two lists to the lxc-devel list ?
Sure, feel free.
___
Vserver mailing list
Vserver@list.linux-vserver.org
http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
Quoting Cedric Le Goater ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
However, i've also heard many times that we should agree before
flooding lkml. So I guess we should use the vserver, openvz, lxc-devel
mailing-list (eric please subscribe to one) before sending our
agreement or
Clément Calmels wrote:
What do you think of
something like this:
o reboot
o run dbench (or wathever) X times
o reboot
Perfectly fine with me.
Here you do not have to reboot. OpenVZ tools does not require OpenVZ
kernel to be built.
You got me... I was still believing the
Clément,
Thanks for addressing my concerns! See comments below.
Clément Calmels wrote:
Hi,
1.1 It would be nice to run vmstat (say, vmstat 10) for the duration of
the tests, and put the vmstat output logs to the site.
Our benchmark framework allows us to use oprofile during test...
Clément Calmels wrote:
Hi,
I'm wondering why a default 'guest' creation implies some resources
restrictions? Couldn't the resources be unlimited? I understand the need
for resource management, but the default values look a little bit
tiny...
The reason is security. A guest is
See my comments below.
In general - please don't get the impression I try to be fastidious. I'm
just trying to help you create a system in which results can be
reproducible and trusted. There are a lot of factors that influence the
performance; some of those are far from being obvious.
Clement,
Thanks for sharing the results! A few comments...
(1) General
1.1 It would be nice to run vmstat (say, vmstat 10) for the duration of
the tests, and put the vmstat output logs to the site.
1.2 Can you tell how you run the tests. I am particularly interested in
- how many iterations
Herbert Poetzl wrote:
Additionally, the pid virtualization we've
been discussing (and which should be submitted soon) would remove the
need for the tasklookup patch, so bsdjail would reduce even further,
to network and simple access controls.
complete pid virtualization would be
Rik Bobbaers wrote:
stable: yes, secure... well... as far as possible, BUT!
multipath using devicemapper in their kernel? almost impossible, unless the
backported that entirely from 2.6.13 (of some 2.6.12 rcX)
a lot of other enhancements in 2.6.8+ kernels... it's for a reason that
kernels
Let me comment on that as well (ccing our users@ mailing list). Sure I'm
biased as well :)
Herbert Poetzl wrote:
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 01:20:13PM +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote:
Factors of interest are
- stability,
Z: the announcement reads first stable OVZ version
Although this is
10 matches
Mail list logo
