[lkml]   [2011]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] new cgroup controller "fork"
On 11/03/2011 05:20 PM, Max Kellermann wrote:
> On 2011/11/03 20:03, Alan Cox<> wrote:
>> Sure - I'm just not seeing that a whole separate cgroup for it is
>> appropriate or a good plan. Anyone doing real resource management needs
>> the rest of the stuff anyway.
> Right. When I saw Frederic's controller today, my first thought was
> that one could move the fork limit code over into that controller. If
> we reach a consensus that this would be a good idea, and would have
> chances to get merged, I could probably take some time to refactor my
> code.
> Max
I'd advise you to take a step back and think if this is really needed.
As Alan pointed out, the really expensive resource here is already being
constrained by Frederic's controller.

But ultimately, you're the only one that knows about your real

 \ /
  Last update: 2011-11-03 20:27    [W:0.055 / U:158.628 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site