[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6599ad830704031029x7931e698pbab3c4f22a46a21d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2007 10:29:01 -0700
From: "Paul Menage" <menage@...gle.com>
To: vatsa@...ibm.com
Cc: sekharan@...ibm.com, ckrm-tech@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xemul@...ru,
containers@...ts.osdl.org, pj@....com,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, mbligh@...gle.com,
winget@...gle.com, rohitseth@...gle.com,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>, dev@...ru, devel@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 7/7] containers (V7): Container interface to nsproxy subsystem
On 4/3/07, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 10:10:35AM -0700, Paul Menage wrote:
> > Agreed. So I'm not saying it's fundamentally a bad idea - just that
> > merging container_group and nsproxy is a fairly simple space
> > optimization that could easily be done later.
>
> IMHO, if we agree that space optimization is important, then its better
> we tackle it right at design phase, rather than ripping it out later ..
>
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil".
I think we're in agreement that there's value in having an aggregator
to avoid every task having to have a forest of pointers. But it
wouldn't be a major design change to switch that aggregator from being
container_group to being nsproxy at some later point.
Paul
-
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