![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
>>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 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||