Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 13 Jun 1996 10:34:57 -0700 (PDT) | From | Jauder Ho <> | Subject | Re: 2.0, loggings, cpu quotas, 2.1 issues, etc. |
| |
hey another use for securelevel :)
On Thu, 13 Jun 1996 Mark.Hemment@uniplex.co.uk wrote:
> >From kmb203@psu.edu > > One (too) simple choice might be to charge for kernel time .. CPU > > spent swapping for a process is added to CPU load from that process. > > If CPU % is then quotad it will keep their process from causing more > > than it's percent of system load. > > I more generic solution would be scheduler classes, as per SVR4 (with > extensions, of course). > Trusted users could have their login shell in a class which allows > high CPU usage - i.e. their processes would be allowed to occupy > the high level run queues. As child process inherit their scheduler > class from their parent's, all should be well. > Other users would be given a class which is only allowed to occupy > the lower level queues. > ...other variations... > > Scheduling of processes could be based upon real memory usage, page > faults, etc, as well as CPU usage - depending upon the class. > Different classes could be written for different environments, with > the schedulers loaded as modules :) > > markhe > >
|  |