[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/5] cpuset memory spread basic implementation
    Ingo wrote:
    > we should default to local.

    Agreed. There is much software and systems management expectations
    sitting on top of this, that have certain expectations of the default
    memory placement behaviour, to a rough degree, of the system.

    They are expecting node-local placement.

    We would only change that default if it was shown to be substantially
    wrong headed in a substantial number of cases. It has not been
    so shown. It is either an adequate or quite desirable default for
    most cases.

    Rather we need to consider optional behaviour, for use on workloads
    for which other policies are worth developing and invoking.

    I won't rest till it's the best ...
    Programmer, Linux Scalability
    Paul Jackson <> 1.925.600.0401
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-02-06 21:04    [W:0.020 / U:52.136 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site