|
because rhas is not meant to be lvs director only, it is meant to do other
tasks also.
while the O1 scheduler can be good for some tasks, it's is not good for the
lvs director, since it includes some preempt functionality.
and the O1 patch in the rh 9 kernel includes much more changes (including
the nptl parts.) than the one in 2.4.9-e.16 ,
Alex.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Reuning" <john@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "LinuxVirtualServer.org users mailing list."
<lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2003 5:56 AM
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] ipvs 1.0.8
> I just noticed that the o1 scheduler patch was included in the
> 2.4.9-e.16 enterprise redhat kernel src.rpm for AS 2.1. The QA is
> supposed to be more rigorous there. I wonder why it's been included if
> there are performance issues? At first glance, I don't see the
> ntpl pieces.
>
> On Fri, 2003-04-11 at 13:05, Alex Kramarov wrote:
>
> > 3. you should not use the kernel-source rpm to build your own kernel,
you
> > should get the kernel.srpm, install it into /usr/src/redhat, and modify
the
> > spec file to include the ipvs patch. i was able to do that, but adding
the
> > ipvs patch, and removing O1 (which includes some preemt pieces) and ntpl
> > related patches from the spec file (i also removed the lowlat patches,
> > although they don't collide with ipvs). these redhat's optimisations are
> > good for desktops, but they are affecting lvs director performance as
much
> > as 25 percent - see the list archives.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LinuxVirtualServer.org mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> or go to http://www.in-addr.de/mailman/listinfo/lvs-users
>
|
