OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 7/7] containers (V7): Container interface to nsproxy subsystem
Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 7/7] containers (V7): Container interface to nsproxy subsystem [message #11717 is a reply to message #11715] Tue, 03 April 2007 17:06 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Srivatsa Vaddagiri is currently offline  Srivatsa Vaddagiri
Messages: 241
Registered: August 2006
Senior Member
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 09:52:35AM -0700, Paul Menage wrote:
> I'm not saying "let's use nsproxy" - I'm not yet convinced that the
> lifetime/mutation/correlation rate of a pointer in an nsproxy is
> likely to be the same as for a container subsystem; if not, then
> reusing nsproxy could actually increase space overheads (since you'd
> end up with more, larger nsproxy objects, compared to smaller numbers
> of smaller nsproxy objects and smaller numbers of smaller
> container_group objects), even though it saved (just) one pointer per
> task_struct.

Even if nsproxy objects are made larger a bit, the number of such object will
be -much- lesser compared to number of task_structs I would think, so
the win/lose in space savings would need to take that into account.


--
Regards,
vatsa
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re: network namespace website
Next Topic: Re: [PATCH] net: Add etun driver
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Sep 16 02:08:35 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.56167 seconds