From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264530AbTIDCgR (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Sep 2003 22:36:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264525AbTIDCgH (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Sep 2003 22:36:07 -0400 Received: from citrine.spiritone.com ([216.99.193.133]:22964 "EHLO citrine.spiritone.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264521AbTIDCfy (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Sep 2003 22:35:54 -0400 Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 19:33:50 -0700 From: "Martin J. Bligh" To: David Lang , William Lee Irwin III cc: Larry McVoy , Alan Cox , "Brown, Len" , Giuliano Pochini , Larry McVoy , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: SSI clusters on NUMA (was Re: Scaling noise) Message-ID: <7710000.1062642829@[10.10.2.4]> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > how much of this need could be met with a native linux master and kernels > running user-mode kernels? (your resource sharing would obviously not be > that clean, but you could develop the tools to work across the kernel > images this way) I talked to Jeff and Andrea about this at KS & OLS this year ... the feeling was that UML was too much overhead, but there were various ways to reduce that, especially if the underlying OS had UML support (doesn't require it right now). I'd really like to see the performance proved to be better before basing a design on UML, though that was my first instinct of how to do it ... M.