Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/9] deadlock prevention core
From: Rik van Riel
Date: Sat Aug 19 2006 - 11:06:17 EST
Andrew Morton wrote:
- We expect that the lots-of-dirty-anon-memory-over-swap-over-network
scenario might still cause deadlocks.
I assert that this can be solved by putting swap on local disks. Peter
asserts that this isn't acceptable due to disk unreliability. I point
out that local disk reliability can be increased via MD, all goes quiet.
A good exposition which helps us to understand whether and why a
significant proportion of the target user base still wishes to do
swap-over-network would be useful.
You cannot put disks in many models of blade servers.
What is important? What you want to be true, or what is true?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/