Messages in this thread |  | | From | Jesse Pollard <> | Subject | Re: [No Subject] | Date | Fri, 13 Sep 2002 13:02:57 -0500 |
| |
On Friday 13 September 2002 12:39 pm, Jim Sibley wrote: > First, please change your replies to me to jimsibley@earthlink.net and drop > the IBM address. Some of my replies may not reflect IBM's position. > > Also please drop the LTC address in your replies. I'm told that the address > is not a > place to discuss issues like this. So much for monolithic turf wars. > > Anyway, back to the important stuff. > > GID might be sufficient if you reserve some GID for resource balancing and > use the /proc interface to update it.
Only when a process can have one gid.
This usually means a single user/application system, in which case you still can't determine which process to kill since they are all in the same group.
Most production shops I have worked in requires multiple groups per user, which gets translated into multiple GIDs per process. This defeats your use of GIDs for resource allocation.
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jesse I Pollard, II Email: pollard@navo.hpc.mil
Any opinions expressed are solely my own. - 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/
|  |