Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760096AbZJMO50 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:57:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759670AbZJMO50 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:57:26 -0400 Received: from lennier.cc.vt.edu ([198.82.162.213]:36029 "EHLO lennier.cc.vt.edu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758721AbZJMO5Z (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:57:25 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.2 To: Pavel Emelyanov Cc: Herbert Poetzl , vatsa@in.ibm.com, Bharata B Rao , Balbir Singh , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dhaval Giani , Vaidyanathan Srinivasan , Gautham R Shenoy , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Avi Kivity , Chris Friesen , Paul Menage , Mike Waychison Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 0/8] CFS Hard limits - v2 In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:19:41 +0400." <4AD4705D.6020109@openvz.org> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu References: <20090930124919.GA19951@in.ibm.com> <4AC35EDD.1080902@openvz.org> <20090930142537.GJ19951@in.ibm.com> <20090930143953.GA2014@in.ibm.com> <4AD466E5.4010206@openvz.org> <20091013120354.GF24787@MAIL.13thfloor.at> <4AD4705D.6020109@openvz.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1255445760_3097P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:56:00 -0400 Message-ID: <4906.1255445760@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> X-Mirapoint-Received-SPF: 128.173.14.107 turing-police.cc.vt.edu Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu 2 pass X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=neutral-1, source=Fixed, refid=n/a, actions=MAILHURDLE SPF TAG X-Junkmail-Info: (0) X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=dagger.cc.vt.edu X-Junkmail-SD-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A020202.4AD49501.009E,ss=1,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2009-07-29 21:33:33, dmn=2009-09-10 00:05:08, mode=multiengine X-Junkmail-IWF: false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1235 Lines: 42 --==_Exmh_1255445760_3097P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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 --==_Exmh_1255445760_3097P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQFK1JUAcC3lWbTT17ARApoJAKCc/qiRsyBiEjROl21lNpLe1mPk3QCgiVx4 G/6dvU82BMIBOGogyNCIw0g= =N46y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1255445760_3097P-- -- 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/