[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC] CPU hard limits
    On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 01:53:15AM -0700, Paul Menage wrote:
    > This claim (and the subsequent long thread it generated on how limits
    > can provide guarantees) confused me a bit.
    > Why do we need limits to provide guarantees when we can already
    > provide guarantees via shares?

    I think the interval over which we need guarantee matters here. Shares
    can generally provide guaranteed share of resource over longer (sometimes
    minutes) intervals. For high-priority bursty workloads, the latency in
    achieving guaranteed resource usage matters. By having hard-limits, we are
    "reserving" (potentially idle) slots where the high-priority group can run and
    claim its guaranteed share almost immediately.

    - vatsa

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-06-05 13:35    [W:0.019 / U:4.168 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site