Hi George, > And one more... > > I think, this is point where we shall think again about XenSockets. > They > well be perfect for IDC.
I definitely agree that we need to create a nice IDC mechanism :) I don't really know what the best mechanism would be... I've heard people talk about a few different options. One option is to create a protocol similar to blkback/blkfront and netback/netfront i.e. using shared memory pages and event channels. This ought to be the highest bandwidth approach. One potential downside is that a software bug in one endpoint can prevent the other domain being cleaned up properly -- the domain will remain in the 'D'ying state until all memory is returned to it. Another option is to create a protocol where instead of sharing memory pages, memcpy() is used to move the data between domains. I think the XCI people might be using a variant of this already. There may be other options... what do you think? Cheers, Dave > > В Птн, 08/10/2010 в 20:54 +0100, Dave Scott пишет: > > Hi, > > > > I've added a draft of a doc called "the dom0 capacity crunch" to the > wiki: > > > > > http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XCP_Overview?action=AttachFile&do=get > &target=xcp_dom0_capacity_crunch.pdf > > > > The doc contains a proposal for dealing with ever-increasing dom0 > load, primarily by moving the load out of dom0 (stubdoms, helper > domains etc) and, where still necessary, tweaking the number of dom0 > vcpus. I think this is becoming pretty important and we'll need to work > on this asap. > > > > Comments are welcome. > > > > Cheers, > > Dave > > > > _______________________________________________ > > xen-api mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-api > > > > _______________________________________________ > xen-api mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-api
_______________________________________________ xen-api mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-api
