Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264378AbTIDA6e (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Sep 2003 20:58:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264460AbTIDA6e (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Sep 2003 20:58:34 -0400 Received: from smtp.bitmover.com ([192.132.92.12]:36992 "EHLO smtp.bitmover.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264378AbTIDA6c (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Sep 2003 20:58:32 -0400 Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 17:58:22 -0700 From: Larry McVoy To: William Lee Irwin III , "Martin J. Bligh" , Alan Cox , "Brown, Len" , Giuliano Pochini , Larry McVoy , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Scaling noise Message-ID: <20030904005822.GC5227@work.bitmover.com> Mail-Followup-To: Larry McVoy , William Lee Irwin III , "Martin J. Bligh" , Alan Cox , "Brown, Len" , Giuliano Pochini , Larry McVoy , Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <20030903111934.GF10257@work.bitmover.com> <20030903180037.GP4306@holomorphy.com> <20030903180547.GD5769@work.bitmover.com> <20030903181550.GR4306@holomorphy.com> <1062613931.19982.26.camel@dhcp23.swansea.linux.org.uk> <20030903194658.GC1715@holomorphy.com> <105370000.1062622139@flay> <20030903212119.GX4306@holomorphy.com> <115070000.1062624541@flay> <20030903215135.GY4306@holomorphy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030903215135.GY4306@holomorphy.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam (whitelisted), SpamAssassin (score=0.5, required 7, AWL, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1586 Lines: 30 On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 02:51:35PM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > At some point in the past, I wrote: > >> SSI clusters have most of the same problems, > >> really. Managing the systems just becomes "managing the nodes" because > >> they're not called systems, and you have to go through some (possibly > >> automated, though not likely) hassle to figure out the right way to > >> spread things across nodes, which virtualizes pieces to hand to which > >> nodes running which loads, etc. > > On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 02:29:01PM -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > > That's where I disagree - it's much easier for the USER because an SSI > > cluster works out all the load balancing shit for itself, instead of > > pushing the problem out to userspace. It's much harder for the KERNEL > > programmer, sure ... but we're smart ;-) And I'd rather solve it once, > > properly, in the right place where all the right data is about all > > the apps running on the system, and the data about the machine hardware. > > This is only truly feasible when the nodes are homogeneous. They will > not be as there will be physical locality (esp. bits like device > proximity) concerns. Huh? The nodes are homogeneous. Devices are either local or proxied. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm - 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/