3 ms·
If the issue is in the kernel, containers won't solve it.
by Florin_Andrei 11y ago
If the issue is in the kernel, containers won't solve it.
- nkurz 11y agoYou are correct. As evidenced by the mention of "each OS", I mangled that sentence and wrote containerization where I should have said virtualization. I meant something like "While containerization wouldn't have helped here, would virtualization (perhaps with each OS pinned to a different set of cores) have helped?"
- Florin_Andrei 11y agoYeah, that sounds better. Either way, if it's a critical service, I'd rather have it running on hardware where there isn't much competition for resources, so not a whole lot of virtualization.
- ryao 11y agoThe hash function includes the address of the struct net when mount namespaces are in use, so if the same service were spread among different containers (or more specifically, different mount namespaces), the hash collisions per bucket might be somewhat more uniform. It would likely be far better to patch the kernel than it would be to abuse mount namespaces to workaround this. That workaround would add complexity for a fairly limited gain that is more by accident than anything else.
- ryao 11y agoThis should have been net means bases not mount names basis. In which case I'll be doesn't make much sense even as a horrible hack.
- ryao 11y agoThat will be the last time that I try using dictation to compose a hacker news comment without reading it. That should have read: "This should have been net namespaces, not mount name spaces. In that case, it does not make sense even as a horrible hack".