Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 4 May 2012 08:21:31 +0900 | Subject | Re: inux-next: Tree for Apr 27 (uml + mm/memcontrol.c) | From | Hiroyuki Kamezawa <> |
| |
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 6:57 AM, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote: > On Thu, 3 May 2012, David Rientjes wrote: > >> Is this a claim that memory-intensive workloads will have the exact same >> performance with and without memcg enabled? > > I've just run specjbb2005 three times on my system both with and without > cgroup_disable=memory on the command line and it is consistently 1% faster > without memcg. Hm, ok. Where is that overheads from ? Do you have perf output ? I'll need to check what is bad.
> If I add XX:+UseLargePages to the command line to use > hugepages it's even larger. So why must I incur this performance > degradation if I simply want to control who may mmap hugepages out of the > global pool?
Is that common use case ? If he wants to do some resource control, common users will limit usual memory, too. That kinds of too much flexibility makes cgroup complicated, hard-to-use.
Thanks, -Kame -- 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/
| |