[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20061117144206.3013D1B6A2@openx4.frec.bull.fr>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 15:42:06 +0100 (CET)
From: Patrick.Le-Dot@...l.net (Patrick.Le-Dot)
To: alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Cc: balbir@...ibm.com, ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net, dev@...nvz.org,
haveblue@...ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, rohitseth@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH 5/8] RSS controller task migration support
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 14:05:13 +0000
> ...
> There are two reasons for wanting memory guarantees
>
> #1 To be sure a user can't toast the entire box but just their own
> compartment (eg web hosting)
Well, this seems not a situation to add a guarantee to this user
but a limit...
> ...
> #2 To ensure all apps continue to make progress
or to ensure that a job is ready to work without to have to pay the
cost of a lot of pagination in...
>> If the limit is a "hard limit" then we have implemented reservation and
>> this is too strict.
>
> Thats fundamentally a judgement based on your particular workload and
> constraints.
Nop.
You can read this on the wiki page...
I'm just saying that the implementation of guarantee with limits seems to
be not enough for #2.
> If I am web hosting then I don't generally care if my end
> users compartment blows up under excess load, I care that the other 200
> customers using the box don't suffer and all phone me to complain.
I agree : limit is necessary and should be a "hard limit" (even if the
controler needs an internal threeshold like a "soft limit" to decide to
wakeup the kswapd).
But this is not the topic (not yet:-)
Patrick
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists