Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 19 Aug 2006 11:06:10 -0400 | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/9] deadlock prevention core |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote:
> - We expect that the lots-of-dirty-anon-memory-over-swap-over-network > scenario might still cause deadlocks. > > I assert that this can be solved by putting swap on local disks. Peter > asserts that this isn't acceptable due to disk unreliability. I point > out that local disk reliability can be increased via MD, all goes quiet. > > A good exposition which helps us to understand whether and why a > significant proportion of the target user base still wishes to do > swap-over-network would be useful.
You cannot put disks in many models of blade servers.
At all.
-- What is important? What you want to be true, or what is true? - 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/
| |