linux-kernel - Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH] UBC: user resource beancounters

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 25 Aug 2006 11:47:24 -0700
From:	Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@...ibm.com>
To:	Kirill Korotaev <dev@...ru>
Cc:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Andrey Savochkin <saw@...ru>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, rohitseth@...gle.com,
	hugh@...itas.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, devel@...nvz.org,
	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH] UBC: user resource beancounters

On Fri, 2006-08-25 at 15:12 +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
<snip>
> > 
> > 
> > Like I said earlier, there is _no_ other way to get the list of tasks
> > belonging to a resource group.
> > 
> > 
> >>Commands like ps and top will show appropriate container number for each
> >>task.
> > 
> > 
> > There is _no_ container number in the non-container environment (or it
> > will be same for _all_ tasks).
> 
> Chandra, virtual container number is essentially the same as user id
> in non-container environment. UBC were desgined for _users_ first.
> Containers were just the first environment which started to use it widely.

I am not denying any of the above :)

I think my original point is getting lost in the discussion, which is,
there should be way (for the sysadmin) to get a list of tasks belonging
to a resource group (in a non-container environment).
> 
> And I really disagree when you say that non-container usecase is
> a superset of container usecase. I believe it is vice versa, since

I meant _only_ w.r.t resource management. My earlier replies were
pointing quite a few of those. here are a few:

- ability for the sysadmin to move a task to a resource group.
- assignment of task to a resource group should be transparent to the 
  app.
- a resource group could exist with no tasks associated.

Containers can work without these features (and as OpenVZ proves it does
work). But, for a QoS type of resource management framework these are
mandatory.

> in container usecase you have a _full_ environment with root user and need
> more resources to be taken into account.

Support for different resources is a different topic. Users (of the two
models) can decide to control as many (or as few) resources as they
want. What I am talking here is about the ability of the framework.

> 
> Thanks,
> Kirill
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> ckrm-tech mailing list
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chandra Seetharaman               | Be careful what you choose....
              - sekharan@...ibm.com   |      .......you may get it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/