Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:40:09 +1200 | From | Sam Vilain <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] CPU controllers? |
| |
Nick Piggin wrote: >> The answer is quite simple, people who are consolidating systems and >> working with fewer, larger systems, want to mark processes, groups of >> processes or entire containers into CPU scheduling classes, then >> either fair balance between them, limit them or reserve them a >> portion of the CPU - depending on the user and what their >> requirements are. What is unclear about that? >> > > It is unclear whether we should have hard limits, or just nice like > priority levels. Whether virtualisation (+/- containers) could be a > good solution, etc.
Look, that was actually answered in the paragraph you're responding to. Once again, give me a set of possible requirements and I'll find you a set of users that have them. I am finding this sub-thread quite redundant.
> If you want to *completely* isolate N groups of users, surely you > have to use virtualisation, unless you are willing to isolate memory > management, pagecache, slab caches, network and disk IO, etc.
No, you have to use separate hardware. Try to claim otherwise and you're glossing over the corner cases.
Sam.
- 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/
| |