[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:0.193 / U:0.960 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site