[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4906.1255445760@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:56:00 -0400
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Cc: Herbert Poetzl <herbert@...hfloor.at>, vatsa@...ibm.com,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
Mike Waychison <mikew@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 0/8] CFS Hard limits - v2
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:19:41 +0400, Pavel Emelyanov said:
> > with 50%, you get 1s/0.5s
> > with 20%, you get 1s/0.2s
> > with 5%, you get 1s/0.05s
> >
> > well, you get the idea :)
>
> No I don't.
> Is 1s/0.5s worse or better than 2s/1s?
> How should I make a choice?
It depends how sensitive you want to be to short bursts of CPU usage.
And of course, if we're going down that route, I'll point out that over in
the network world, 95% percentile billing is pretty popular. How to do it
in this application, I have not a clue. ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burstable_billing
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists