On 03/26/2012 05:26 PM, huxinwei wrote: > My point is about _different_ VMs reading the same object. > It doesn't matter how you optimize guest here ...
We can't read the same object from mutiple VMs right now. (Farm originally supports naming the object by hash content for data deduplication) If we do, yes, in this scenario, we would benefit some workloads (mostly read, seldom write) from a unified and content-named cache. But for a general cache, if we have a unified cache (be it in memory or on disk) that serve a lot of VM requests concurrently, I think we would meet the lock contention problem, hardly to be scalable. So we might later have a unified cache complementarity(a transparent write through cache) in memory for this kind of read acceleration on top of object cache, which just aims to be generally reducing the network traffic by absorbing IO requests locally. Thanks, Yuan -- sheepdog mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wpkg.org/mailman/listinfo/sheepdog
