On Thu, 2015-09-17 at 16:27 +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote:

> Nice. Just to be sure, is my understending of the columns label
> accurate?
>  - 'No affinity'     == no hard nor soft affinity for any VM
>  - 'Pinning'         == hard affinity used to pin VMs to NUMA nodes
>                         (evenly, I guess?); soft affinity untouched
>  - 'NUMA scheduling' == soft affinity used to associate VMs to NUMA
>                         nodes (evenly, I guess?); hard affinity
>                         untouched
> 
> Also, can you confirm that all the hard and soft affinity setting were
> done at VM creation time, i.e., they were effectively influencing where
> the memory of the VMs was being allocated? (It looks like so, from the
> number, but I wanted to be sure...)
> 
BTW, just to be clear, I'm actually reviewing v4 of this series... I'm
not re-reviewing v3. :-D

However, in the process of doing so, I was looking back at previous
submissions as well, I found this and decided it was worthwhile to ask.

I know that these measurements were done on v3 and are not valid for v4
(because that version misses, and that is intentional, some of the soft
affinity bits). Still, I think it is important to keep these numbers in
mind, as they provide (at least part of) the justification for doing the
whole hard and soft affinity work, and hence I asked for the
clarifications.

Dario
-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)