Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 13:40:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 13:40:49 -0500 Received: from waste.org ([209.173.204.2]:55479 "EHLO waste.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 13:40:29 -0500 Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 12:39:54 -0600 (CST) From: Oliver Xymoron To: Rik van Riel cc: Bosko Radivojevic , Erik Mouw , Andrea Arcangeli , Subject: Re: vm philosophising In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Bosko Radivojevic wrote: > > > There is no way to make one good VM for all possible situations. But, > > you can tune/make one VM to work great on large DBMS (e.g.) and > > tune/make another one to work great on ordinary desktop systems > > This is an interesting assertion ... but up to date nobody has > been able to tell me what exactly should be different between > these two mythical VMs ;) There is another VM that has a property that people would like: deterministically handling memory exhaustion. Unfortunately, that VM probably can't co-exist with over-commit and the performance gains that affords. -- "Love the dolphins," she advised him. "Write by W.A.S.T.E.." - 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/