lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Frontswap [PATCH 0/4] (was Transcendent Memory): overview

> > If block layer overhead is a problem, go ahead and optimize it instead
> > of adding new interfaces to bypass it. Though I expect it wouldn't be
> > needed, and if any optimization needs to be done it is in the swap
> > layer.
> > Optimizing swap has the additional benefit of improving performance on
> > flash-backed swap.
> > :
> > What happens when no tmem is available? you swap to a volume. That's
> > the disk size needed.
> > :
> > You're dynamic swap is limited too. And no, no guest modifications.
>
> You keep saying you are going to implement all of the dynamic features
> of frontswap with no changes to the guest and no copying and no
> host-swapping. You are being disingenuous. VMware has had a lot

I don't see why no copying is a requirement. I believe requirement
should be "it is fast enough".
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-05-03 21:35    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans