* Re: [PATCH 0/11] ksm: NUMA trees and page migration
[not found] ` <20130128155452.16882a6e.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
@ 2013-01-29 1:07 ` Hugh Dickins
2013-01-29 10:45 ` Gleb Natapov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Hugh Dickins @ 2013-01-29 1:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti, Gleb Natapov, Petr Holasek, Andrea Arcangeli,
Izik Eidus, Rik van Riel, David Rientjes, Anton Arapov,
Mel Gorman, linux-kernel, linux-mm, kvm
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 17:53:10 -0800 (PST)
> Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Here's a KSM series
>
> Sanity check: do you have a feeling for how useful KSM is?
> Performance/space improvements for typical (or atypical) workloads?
> Are people using it? Successfully?
>
> IOW, is it justifying itself?
I have no idea! To me it's simply a technical challenge - and I agree
with your implication that that's not a good enough justification.
I've added Marcelo and Gleb and the KVM list to the Cc:
my understanding is that it's the KVM guys who really appreciate KSM.
Hugh
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/11] ksm: NUMA trees and page migration
2013-01-29 1:07 ` [PATCH 0/11] ksm: NUMA trees and page migration Hugh Dickins
@ 2013-01-29 10:45 ` Gleb Natapov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Gleb Natapov @ 2013-01-29 10:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hugh Dickins
Cc: Andrew Morton, Marcelo Tosatti, Petr Holasek, Andrea Arcangeli,
Izik Eidus, Rik van Riel, David Rientjes, Anton Arapov,
Mel Gorman, linux-kernel, linux-mm, kvm
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 05:07:15PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 17:53:10 -0800 (PST)
> > Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Here's a KSM series
> >
> > Sanity check: do you have a feeling for how useful KSM is?
> > Performance/space improvements for typical (or atypical) workloads?
> > Are people using it? Successfully?
> >
> > IOW, is it justifying itself?
>
> I have no idea! To me it's simply a technical challenge - and I agree
> with your implication that that's not a good enough justification.
>
> I've added Marcelo and Gleb and the KVM list to the Cc:
> my understanding is that it's the KVM guys who really appreciate KSM.
>
KSM is used on all RH kvm deployments for memory overcommit. I asked
around for numbers and got the answer that it allows to squeeze anywhere
between 10% and 100% more VMs on the same machine depends on a type of
a guest OS and how similar workloads of VMs are. And management tries
to keep VMs with similar OSes/workloads on the same host to gain more
from KSM.
--
Gleb.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-01-29 10:45 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <alpine.LNX.2.00.1301251747590.29196@eggly.anvils>
[not found] ` <20130128155452.16882a6e.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2013-01-29 1:07 ` [PATCH 0/11] ksm: NUMA trees and page migration Hugh Dickins
2013-01-29 10:45 ` Gleb Natapov
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox