From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4B6561F9-9D86-4B83-8ABE-13D00DABDABB@gmail.com> References: <13426df11003161029v7fb35a3ft51d0e64af29aca72@mail.gmail.com> <13426df11003161119s285173f0tc4d5004554e1185d@mail.gmail.com> <13426df11003161604t20c78a8btb4dc38bde0245c4e@mail.gmail.com> <4B6561F9-9D86-4B83-8ABE-13D00DABDABB@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:52:46 -0800 Message-ID: <13426df11003161652k2f30609bod15be880af2ee26@mail.gmail.com> From: ron minnich To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] interesting qemu problem Topicbox-Message-UUID: eb0f645e-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Eric Van Hensbergen wro= te: > You could configure venti to be less aggressive with its use of memory, b= ut that would likely hurt performance. > > Running venti inside qemu is silly. =A0If you really want venti for your = vm, run venti on the host and target your in-vm fossil at it. I tend to disagree. If I'm running qemu it is because I want to simulate a whole-machine environment. If I don't need that simulation, I'll go back to 9vx. but YMMV. ron