OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » Re: [patch 2/6] [Network namespace] Network device sharing by view
Re: [patch 2/6] [Network namespace] Network device sharing by view [message #4080 is a reply to message #4068] Wed, 28 June 2006 10:14 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Cedric Le Goater is currently offline  Cedric Le Goater
Messages: 443
Registered: February 2006
Senior Member
Hi !

Eric W. Biederman wrote:

[ ... ]

> So just to sink one additional nail in the coffin of the silly
> guest to guest communication issue. For any two guests where
> fast communication between them is really important I can run
> an additional interface pair that requires no routing or bridging.
> Given that the implementation of the tunnel device is essentially
> the same as the loopback interface and that I make only one
> trip through the network stack there will be no performance overhead.
> Similarly for any critical guest communication to the outside world
> I can give the guest a real network adapter.
>
> That said I don't think those things will be necessary and that if
> they are it is an optimization opportunity to make various bits
> of the network stack faster.

just one comment on the 'guest to guest communication' topic :

guest to guest communication is an important factor in consolidation
scenarios, where containers are packed on one server. This for maintenance
issues or priority issues on a HPC cluster for example. This case of
container migration is problably the most interesting and the performance
should be more than acceptable. May be not a top priority for the moment.


thanks,

C.
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re: [patch 2/6] [Network namespace] Network device sharing by view
Next Topic: [patch 1/4] Network namespaces: cleanup of dev_base list use
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Aug 04 23:15:29 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 1.23079 seconds