Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030472AbWIMBem (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:34:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030478AbWIMBel (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:34:41 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.45.12]:3706 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030472AbWIMBel (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:34:41 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=received:subject:from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references: content-type:organization:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=AB1aaoVw9LBWyqcX56LKesAhqWDApH8tXDHkWr7ZbFFJW9lTpXx9NJwMjqmuV1OMg w2wFPEu0KyibskABMBO+Q== Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added user memory) From: Rohit Seth Reply-To: rohitseth@google.com To: sekharan@us.ibm.com Cc: Rik van Riel , vatsa@in.ibm.com, Alan Cox , CKRM-Tech , balbir@in.ibm.com, Dave Hansen , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andi Kleen , Christoph Hellwig , Andrey Savochkin , Matt Helsley , Hugh Dickins , Alexey Dobriyan , Kirill Korotaev , Oleg Nesterov , devel@openvz.org, Pavel Emelianov In-Reply-To: <1158109991.4800.43.camel@linuxchandra> References: <44FD918A.7050501@sw.ru> <44FDAB81.5050608@in.ibm.com> <44FEC7E4.7030708@sw.ru> <44FF1EE4.3060005@in.ibm.com> <1157580371.31893.36.camel@linuxchandra> <45011CAC.2040502@openvz.org> <1157743424.19884.65.camel@linuxchandra> <1157751834.1214.112.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> <1157999107.6029.7.camel@linuxchandra> <1158001831.12947.16.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> <20060912104410.GA28444@in.ibm.com> <1158081752.20211.12.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> <1158105732.4800.26.camel@linuxchandra> <1158108203.20211.52.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> <1158109991.4800.43.camel@linuxchandra> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Google Inc Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 18:33:38 -0700 Message-Id: <1158111218.20211.69.camel@galaxy.corp.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.1.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1415 Lines: 35 On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 18:13 -0700, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 17:43 -0700, Rohit Seth wrote: > > > > > It won't be a complete solution, as the user won't be able to > > > - set both guarantee and limit for a resource group > > > - use limit on some and guarantee on some > > > - optimize the usage of available resources > > > > I think, if we have some of the dynamic resource limit adjustments > > possible then some of the above functionality could be achieved. And I > > think that could be a good start point. > > > Yes, dynamic resource adjustments should be available. But, you can't > expect the sysadmin to sit around and keep tweaking the limits so as to > achieve the QoS he wants. (Even if you have an application sitting and > doing it, as I pointed in other email it may not be possible for > different scenarios). > > As said earlier, if strict QoS is desired then system should be appropriately partitioned so that the sum of limits doesn't exceed physical limit (that is cost of QoS). Let us first get at least that much settled on and accepted in mainline before getting into these esoteric features. -rohit - 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/