Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751308AbWISIEy (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Sep 2006 04:04:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751314AbWISIEy (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Sep 2006 04:04:54 -0400 Received: from mailhub.sw.ru ([195.214.233.200]:62254 "EHLO relay.sw.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751308AbWISIEw (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Sep 2006 04:04:52 -0400 Message-ID: <450FA4A2.4050801@openvz.org> Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 12:04:50 +0400 From: Pavel Emelianov User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060317) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sekharan@us.ibm.com CC: balbir@in.ibm.com, Rik van Riel , Srivatsa , CKRM-Tech , Dave Hansen , Andi Kleen , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Christoph Hellwig , Andrey Savochkin , devel@openvz.org, Matt Helsley , Hugh Dickins , Alexey Dobriyan , Kirill Korotaev , Oleg Nesterov , Alan Cox Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added user memory) 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> <1157730221.26324.52.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4501B5F0.9050802@in.ibm.com> <450508BB.7020609@openvz.org> <4505161E.1040401@in.ibm.com> <45051AC7.2000607@openvz.org> <1158000590.6029.33.camel@linuxchandra> <45069072.4010007@openvz.org> <1158105488.4800.23.camel@linuxchandra> <4507BC11.6080203@openvz.org> <1158186664.18927.17.camel@linuxchandra> <45090A6E.1040206@openvz.org> <1158277364.6357.33.camel@linuxchandra> <450A5325.6090803@openvz.org> <450A6A7A.8010102@sw.ru> <450A8B61.7040905@openvz.org> <450E5813.2040804@in.ibm.com> <450E5F2E.2070809@openvz.org> <1158624359.6536.17.camel@linuxchandra> In-Reply-To: <1158624359.6536.17.camel@linuxchandra> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1716 Lines: 44 Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 12:56 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote: > > > > >> The same for the limiting - either do not start new container, or >> recalculate limits to meet new requirements. You may not take care of >> guarantees as weel and create an overcommited configuration. >> >> And one more thing. We've asked it many times and I ask it again - >> please, show us the other way for providing guarantee rather than >> limiting or reserving. >> > > Why do we want the capability to be snipped at the infrastructure level. > Let the controller writers decide how they want to provide the > capability and the users to decide if they want to use the feature at a > price. > That's what we proposed in the very beginning - to review an infrastructure with minimal functionality (limiting) and develop new features after the "core" is accepted. I'm glad that we've finaly made a bargain :) > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 >> - 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/