On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 3:54 AM, Matt Joyce <matt.jo...@cloudscaling.com> wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Soren Hansen <so...@linux2go.dk> wrote: >> >> 2012/5/30 Matt Joyce <matt.jo...@cloudscaling.com>: >> > Secondly, while LXC does provide a lot of native access, it still does >> > paging management internally just as kvm does. So direct memory >> > management >> > ( some HPC users like this ) becomes just as problematic as it is in >> > kvm. >> > Lots of overhead. >> >> I'm not convinced this is accurate. Can you provide some kind of >> reference for this? >> > > Okay so KVM uses a nastier abstraction layer in the form of shadow paging, > while LXC simply relies on cgroups for memory isolation. Obviously two very > different beasts. But there is the overhead of cgroup accounting and > resource management inside LXC. It's not the same, and not nearly as much > overhead but it's still there. Doesn't hardware feature such as Extend-Page-Table (EPT) or Nested-Page-Table (NPT) help in the case of KVM? There's still some extra cost than native page table but should be better than software solution in most use cases.
> pick your mirror: /kernel/Documentation/cgroups/memory.txt > > would be the best docs I know of. > > -Matt > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > -- Regards Huang Zhiteng _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
