Re: What about...

["William J. Earl" <wje@fir.engr.sgi.com>]

Alan Cox writes:
 > > many "holes"...  The idea of a simple buddy-system allocator as is
 > > ingrained in the Linux kernel falls apart completely in the face of
 > > this kind of architecture.   I suppose you could run a copy of Linux
 > > on every node, but I consider that an excuse rather than a solution.
 > 
 > Actually the Linux buddy stuff is quite happy with holes. Its still
 > completely inappropriate. From the above I deduce we'd have to do
 > mips64 before we even considerd it anyway

     Yes, the address space is very large, even in a single rack.