From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tim Post Subject: Re: Distro kernel and 'virtualization server' vs. 'server that sometimes runs virtual instances' rant (was: Re: Re: [GIT PULL] Xen APIC hooks (with io_apic_ops)) Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 01:00:51 +0800 Message-ID: <1243789251.5369.37.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1243788289.5369.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> Reply-To: echo@echoreply.us Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1243788289.5369.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Luke S Crawford Cc: Dan Magenheimer , Xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Sorry, hit send too quickly: On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 00:44 +0800, Tim Post wrote: > So in a large way, I think Dan is correct. If a client bought the use of > memory and barely uses it, I'd rather give them a discount for giving > some back, enabling me to set up another domain on that node. But don't > get me wrong, I'd never dream of doing that 'automagically' :) I meant to add, if an overcommit feature could just make and log suggestions, it would eliminate a ton of userspace hackery. Thus, it would be very useful to hosts (albeit in a neutered form). Most hosts would gladly deal with sed, grep and awk vs libxc and libxs :) Cheers, --Tim