lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Going forward with Resource Management - A cpu controller
    >>I think the risk is that OpenVZ has all the controls and resource
    >>managers we need, while CKRM is still more research-ish. I find the
    >>OpenVZ code much clearer, cleaner and complete at the moment, although
    >>also much more conservative in its approach to solving problems.
    >
    >
    > I think it would be nice to compare first the features provided by ckrm and
    > openvz at some point and agree upon the minimum common features we need to have
    > as we go forward. For instance I think Openvz assumes that tasks do
    > not need to move between containers (task-groups), whereas ckrm provides this
    > flexibility for workload management. This may have some effect on the
    > controller/interface design, no?
    OpenVZ assumes that tasks can't move between task-groups for a single reason:
    user shouldn't be able to escape from the container.
    But this have no implication on the design/implementation.

    BTW, do you see any practical use cases for tasks jumping between resource-containers?

    Kirill

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-08-04 16:53    [W:0.019 / U:4.516 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site