From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:29:02 +0200 From: Benjamin Henrion Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Texas UML instances and OLSR+BATMAN tests Message-ID: <20071009142902.GA23682@localhost> References: <20070608201844.GM20739@localhost> <200710090953.43820.axel@open-mesh.net> <470B45AE.40502@poelzi.org> <200710091450.50135.axel@open-mesh.net> <00C3015B-8933-42C5-975D-22FE7DCF83AF@lo-res.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <00C3015B-8933-42C5-975D-22FE7DCF83AF@lo-res.org> Sender: Benjamin Henrion Reply-To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking Cc: Petrovitsch Bernd Aaron Kaplan [071009]: > > Just yesterday I had a brief talk with Herbert from vserver. He > mentioned that it should be ok to use different routing tables in > each vserver instance. If this works out then I would like to know if > vserver is a viable alternative. Vserver is very low overhead. One of > the problems that I had with UML is the high (soft-)IRQ load. > this produces permanent context switches and no work gets done. (if > you start 1000 instances that is!) :) > > Can somebody test what happens if you start many instances in openVZ > and vserver? Many = which number? I have started 10 of those, and it works fine on a 1500Mhz machine with 512MB of RAM on a livecd system with minimal debian filesystems on a harddisk. -- Benjamin Henrion FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403