[Devel] Re: IO scheduler based IO Controller V2

[Balbir Singh]

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz at infradead.org> [2009-05-06 00:20:49]:

> On Tue, 2009-05-05 at 13:24 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue,  5 May 2009 15:58:27 -0400
> > Vivek Goyal <vgoyal at redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > Hi All,
> > > 
> > > Here is the V2 of the IO controller patches generated on top of 2.6.30-rc4.
> > > ...
> > > Currently primarily two other IO controller proposals are out there.
> > > 
> > > dm-ioband
> > > ---------
> > > This patch set is from Ryo Tsuruta from valinux.
> > > ...
> > > IO-throttling
> > > -------------
> > > This patch set is from Andrea Righi provides max bandwidth controller.
> > 
> > I'm thinking we need to lock you guys in a room and come back in 15 minutes.
> > 
> > Seriously, how are we to resolve this?  We could lock me in a room and
> > cmoe back in 15 days, but there's no reason to believe that I'd emerge
> > with the best answer.
> > 
> > I tend to think that a cgroup-based controller is the way to go. 
> > Anything else will need to be wired up to cgroups _anyway_, and that
> > might end up messy.
> 
> FWIW I subscribe to the io-scheduler faith as opposed to the
> device-mapper cult ;-)
> 
> Also, I don't think a simple throttle will be very useful, a more mature
> solution should cater to more use cases.
>

I tend to agree, unless Andrea can prove us wrong. I don't think
throttling a task (not letting it consume CPU, memory when its IO
quota is exceeded) is a good idea. I've asked that question to Andrea
a few times, but got no response.
 

-- 
	Balbir
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers