Jamie Lokier wrote:
quoted text
> If you have a single data forwarder elected per client, then if one
> client generates a lot of traffic, you concentrate a lot of traffic to
> one network link and one CPU.  Sometimes it's better to elect several
> leaders per client, and hash requests onto them.  You diffuse CPU and
> traffic, but reduce opportunities to aggregate transactions into fewer
> message.  It's an interesting problem, again probably with different
> optimal results for different networks.


Definitely.  "several leaders" aka partitioning is also becoming 
increasing paired with efforts at enhancing locality of reference.  Both 
Google and Amazon sort their distributed tables lexographically, which 
[ideally] results in similar data being stored near each other.

A bit of an improvement over partitioning-by-hash, anyway, for some 
workloads.

	Jeff


--
unsubscribe notice
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/