Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 6 Feb 2006 12:01:09 -0800 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [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 <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |