Sam Vilain wrote:
Nick Piggin wrote:
The answer is quite simple, people who are consolidating systems and
working with fewer, larger systems, want to mark processes, groups of
processes or entire containers into CPU scheduling classes, then
either fair balance between them, limit them or reserve them a
portion of the CPU - depending on the user and what their
requirements are. What is unclear about that?
It is unclear whether we should have hard limits, or just nice like
priority levels. Whether virtualisation (+/- containers) could be a
good solution, etc.
Look, that was actually answered in the paragraph you're responding to.
Once again, give me a set of possible requirements and I'll find you a
set of users that have them. I am finding this sub-thread quite redundant.
Clearly we can't stuff everything into the kernel. What I'm asking is
what the important functionality is that people want to cover. I don't
know how you could possibly interpret it as anything else.
If you want to *completely* isolate N groups of users, surely you
have to use virtualisation, unless you are willing to isolate memory
management, pagecache, slab caches, network and disk IO, etc.
No, you have to use separate hardware. Try to claim otherwise and you're
glossing over the corner cases.
Well, virtualisation seems like it would get you a lot further than
containers for the same amount of work.
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
