* Daniel Veillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-09-28 12:59]: > On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 12:41:21PM -0500, Ryan Harper wrote: > > * Elizabeth Kon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-09-28 12:32]: > > > >no, we can always get a total of _free_ memory, we just don't have a > > > >call for _total_ ram (ie, free and non-free) -- only what's in the heap > > > >(free mem). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I asked DV about this off-list and he said he actually wanted total, not > > > free. DV please correct me if I misunderstood. > > > > Ah, OK - the text as written mentions _free_ - which is why I responded. > > It seems a bit silly to me to have topology informations about which > CPUs are part of the same Cell (i.e. share the same memory costs) but > being unable to find out how much memory is actually local to that cell. > Sure the current free heap on that cell helps to place new jobs but it's > only a temporary view.
I don't see how having the total changes anything - we need current free to determine where the next (even first) vm should go. -- Ryan Harper Software Engineer; Linux Technology Center IBM Corp., Austin, Tx (512) 838-9253 T/L: 678-9253 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Libvir-list mailing list Libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
