Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/9] deadlock prevention core

[Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>]

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.

At all.

--
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@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/