News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Oxide Computer Company: Initial boot sequence by mochomocha on Monday December 02, 2019 @01:21PM (#21685130)
That's not completely accurate. Hardware & OSes have not been designed for heavy multi-tenancy, leading to (among other issues) cache interference. At Netflix [1], we have to do quite a bit of work to undo that. Bigger orgs like Google have spent more than a decade improving the Linux scheduler in their own fork for similar reasons.

[1] https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/predictive-cpu-isolation...

Re:Oxide Computer Company: Initial boot sequence by codeflo on Monday December 02, 2019 @02:33PM (#21685947)
Very interesting link, thanks. Obviously your use case goes way beyond running a standard Docker installation. It sounds like you really want the kernel to schedule containers instead of processes -- which it doesn't really do by default, hence my comment. Perhaps it shouldn't be surprising, that you're able to get these clear performance gains from a highly optimized special-purpose scheduler. Still, I was a bit surprised. :)

However, that's at the OS level. What can realistically be done at the hardware level? It must be possible in theory to design a CPU that's better at this kind of context switching, but I don't know if a new "computer company" really wants to go there.

Re:Oxide Computer Company: Initial boot sequence by shaklee3 on Tuesday December 03, 2019 @01:04AM (#21690318)
While that's true, this particular company doesn't seem to be targeting anything that would improve containers (OS optimizations, new CPU). So I think the OP was correct in that simply changing the BMC or making it more secure on boot won't affect containers.
Re:Oxide Computer Company: Initial boot sequence by puzza007 on Tuesday December 03, 2019 @04:04AM (#21690951)
I'd be surprised if they didn't leverage something like the SmartOS container capabilities https://www.joyent.com/smartos