Sorry, my point about numad being libvirt specific was that I couldn't find references to other hypervisors using numad for their placement. I recognise that it's not _tied_ to libvirt but the reality seems to be that only libvirt uses it. Xen, for example, can't use numad because dom0 might only know about a subset of the system - it'd make sense for dom0 to only be placed on a single numa node. Xen does of course have its own automatic placement to take account of the numa nodes - I assume this is also true of other hypervisors. Perhaps my question is a broader one about whether we want Nova to have some influence in the pinning rules, or if we just want to ignore numa placement and let each hypervisor to do it in its own way? Bob -----Original Message----- From: Daniel P. Berrange [mailto:berrange at redhat.com] Sent: 21 June 2013 10:55 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Efficiently pin running VMs to physical CPUs automatically On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 09:10:32AM +0000, Bob Ball wrote: > It seems that numad is libvirt specific - is that the case? No, it is a completely independant project https://git.fedorahosted.org/git/numad.git It existed before libvirt started using it for automatic placement. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev