* 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