| Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added user memory) [message #6484 is a reply to message #6378] |
Mon, 18 September 2006 23:48   |
Chandra Seetharaman
Messages: 88
Registered: August 2006
|
Member |
|
|
On Fri, 2006-09-15 at 11:15 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-09-14 at 11:53 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >
> >>> What if I have 40 containers each with 2% guarantee ? what do we do
> >>> then ? and many other different combinations (what I gave was not the
> >>> _only_ scenario).
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Then you need to solve a set of 40 equations. This sounds weird, but
> >> don't afraid - sets like these are solved lightly.
> >>
> >
> > extrapolate that to a varying # of permutations and real time changes in
> > the system workload. Won't it be complex ?
> >
> I have a C program that computes limits to obtain desired guarantees
> in a single 'for (i = 0; i < n; n++)' loop for any given set of guarantees.
> With all error handling, beautifull output, nice formatting etc it weights
> only 60 lines.
> > Wouldn't it be a lot simpler if we have the guarantee support instead ?
> > Why you do not like guarantee ? :)
> >
> I do not 'do not like guarantee'. I'm just sure that there are two ways
> for providing guarantee (for unreclaimable resorces):
> 1. reserving resource for group in advance
> 2. limit resource for others
> Reserving is worse as it is essentially limiting (you cut off 100Mb from
> 1Gb RAM thus limiting the other groups by 900Mb RAM), but this limiting
> is too strict - you _have_ to reserve less than RAM size. Limiting in
> run-time is more flexible (you may create an overcommited BC if you
> want to) and leads to the same result - guarantee.
I do not agree with, "it will limit the efficient usage of resource,
hence lets not provide the feature".
We should provide the feature to the user and the user decide how they
want the resources to be used.
If they decide to use guarantees, they do know what is the cost.
> > <snip>
> >
> [snip]
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------
> 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&b id=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> ckrm-tech mailing list
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
--
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
Chandra Seetharaman | Be careful what you choose....
- sekharan@us.ibm.com | .......you may get it.
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
|
|
|
|
| Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added user memory) [message #6485 is a reply to message #6381] |
Mon, 18 September 2006 23:51 |
Chandra Seetharaman
Messages: 88
Registered: August 2006
|
Member |
|
|
On Fri, 2006-09-15 at 12:49 +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> > <snip>
> >
> >>Reserving in advance means that sometimes you won't be able to start a
> >>new group without taking back some of reserved pages. This is ... strange.
> >
> >
> > I do not see it strange. At the time of creation, user sees the failure
> > (that there isn't enough resource to provide the required/requested
> > guarantee) and can act accordingly.
> >
> > BTW, VMware does it this way.
> This is not true at least for ESX server.
Hmm, from what I have seen, in ESX server, creation of a VM will fail,
if the specified guarantees cannot meet at the time of creation.
> It overcommits memory and does dirty tricks like balooning to free memory then.
This is how they handle over commit, which is not what I was talking
about.
<snip>
--
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
Chandra Seetharaman | Be careful what you choose....
- sekharan@us.ibm.com | .......you may get it.
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added user memory) [message #6490 is a reply to message #6470] |
Tue, 19 September 2006 00:08 |
Chandra Seetharaman
Messages: 88
Registered: August 2006
|
Member |
|
|
On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 16:37 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> Balbir Singh wrote:
>
> [snip]
> >
> > The program (calculate_limits()) listed on the website does not work for
> > the following case
> >
> > N=2;
> > R=100;
> > g[2] = {30, 30};
> >
> >
> > The output is -10 and -10 for the limits
> >
> > For
> >
> > N=3;
> > R=100;
> > g[3] = {30, 30, 10};
> >
> > I get -70, -70 and -110 as the limits
> >
> > Am I interpreting the parameters correctly? Or the program is broken?
> >
>
> Program on site is broken. Thanks for noticing:
>
> $ gcc guar.c -o guar
> $ ./guar 30 30
> guar lim
> 30 70 ( 70/1)
> 30 70 ( 70/1)
> $ ./guar 30 30 10
> guar lim
> 30 45 ( 90/2)
> 30 45 ( 90/2)
> 10 25 ( 50/2)
I am confused. Are you changing the parameters on how the user want the
groups to be controlled.
They want the resource usage to be between 30 and 70, but you change it
to be 30-45.
>
>
> To stop future "errors" remember that this is a simplified program that
> considers guarantees to be <= 100%, sum of guarantees to be <= 100% etc.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------
> 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&b id=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> ckrm-tech mailing list
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
--
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
Chandra Seetharaman | Be careful what you choose....
- sekharan@us.ibm.com | .......you may get it.
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added user memory) [message #6495 is a reply to message #6490] |
Tue, 19 September 2006 08:06 |
Pavel Emelianov
Messages: 1149
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 16:37 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
>
>> Balbir Singh wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> The program (calculate_limits()) listed on the website does not work for
>>> the following case
>>>
>>> N=2;
>>> R=100;
>>> g[2] = {30, 30};
>>>
>>>
>>> The output is -10 and -10 for the limits
>>>
>>> For
>>>
>>> N=3;
>>> R=100;
>>> g[3] = {30, 30, 10};
>>>
>>> I get -70, -70 and -110 as the limits
>>>
>>> Am I interpreting the parameters correctly? Or the program is broken?
>>>
>>>
>> Program on site is broken. Thanks for noticing:
>>
>> $ gcc guar.c -o guar
>> $ ./guar 30 30
>> guar lim
>> 30 70 ( 70/1)
>> 30 70 ( 70/1)
>> $ ./guar 30 30 10
>> guar lim
>> 30 45 ( 90/2)
>> 30 45 ( 90/2)
>> 10 25 ( 50/2)
>>
>
> I am confused. Are you changing the parameters on how the user want the
> groups to be controlled.
>
Nope. I just calculate some auxiliary values to acheive the goal.
> They want the resource usage to be between 30 and 70, but you change it
> to be 30-45.
>
User wants group to consume _at_least_ 30%. I do provide it, but do not
prevent it from consuming more.
>
>> To stop future "errors" remember that this is a simplified program that
>> considers guarantees to be <= 100%, sum of guarantees to be <= 100% etc.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------
>> 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&b id=263057&dat=121642
>> _______________________________________________
>> ckrm-tech mailing list
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
>>
|
|
|
|
OpenVZ Forum
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
