[Devel] Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] Resource Management - Infrastructure choices

Pavel Emelianov xemul at openvz.org
Thu Nov 2 00:42:41 PST 2006


Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 11:01:31AM +0300, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
>>> Sorry dont get you here. Are you saying we should support different
>>> grouping for different controllers?
>> Not me, but other people in this thread.
> 
> Hmm ..I thought OpenVz folks were interested in having different
> groupings for different resources i.e grouping for CPU should be
> independent of the grouping for memory.
> 
> 	http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/8/18/98
> 
> Isnt that true?

That's true. We don't mind having different groupings for
different resources. But what I was sying in this thread is
"I didn't *propose* this thing, I just *agreed* that this
might be usefull for someone."

So if we're going to have different groupings for different
resources what's the use of "container" grouping all "controllers"
together? I see this situation like each task_struct carries
pointers to kmemsize controller, pivate pages controller,
physical pages controller, CPU time controller, disk bandwidth
controller, etc. Right? Or did I miss something?




More information about the Devel mailing list