openstack team mailing list archive

[Soren Hansen <soren@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

2012/5/30 Matt Joyce <matt.joyce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Soren Hansen <soren@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 2012/5/30 Matt Joyce <matt.joyce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> 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.

Ah, yes. Cgroups. I'm obviously behind the times. In my head, an LXC
container is just a namespaced (set of) process(es). Very good point.
Thanks.

-- 
Soren Hansen             | http://linux2go.dk/
Senior Software Engineer | http://www.cisco.com/
Ubuntu Developer         | http://www.ubuntu.com/
OpenStack Developer      | http://www.openstack.org/