Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] Resource Management - Infrastructure choices

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:

       - Support limit (soft and/or hard depending on the resource
         type) in controllers. Guarantee feature could be indirectly
         met thr limits.

I just thought I'd weigh in on this. As far as our usage pattern is concerned, guarantees cannot be met via limits.

I want to give "x" cpu to container X, "y" cpu to container Y, and "z" cpu to container Z.

If these are percentages, x+y+z must be less than 100.

However, if Y does not use its share of the cpu, I would like the leftover cpu time to be made available to X and Z, in a ratio based on their allocated weights.

With limits, I don't see how I can get the ability for containers to make opportunistic use of cpu that becomes available.

I can see that with things like memory this could become tricky (How do you free up memory that was allocated to X when Y decides that it really wants it after all?) but for CPU I think it's a valid scenario.

Chris
-
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]
  Powered by Linux