| Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC] Resource Management - Infrastructure choices [message #7930] |
Mon, 30 October 2006 17:16 |
Dave McCracken
Messages: 2
Registered: October 2006
|
Junior Member |
|
|
On Monday 30 October 2006 11:09 am, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> Hierarchy has implications in not just the kernel-user API, but also on
> the controller design. I would prefer to progressively enhance the
> controller, not supporting hierarchy in the begining.
>
> However you do have a valid concern that, if we dont design the user-kernel
> API keeping hierarchy in mind, then we may break this interface when we
> latter add hierarchy support, which will be bad.
>
> One possibility is to design the user-kernel interface that supports
> hierarchy but not support creating hierarchical depths more than 1 in the
> initial versions. Would that work?
Is there any user demand for heirarchy right now? I agree that we should
design the API to allow heirarchy, but unless there is a current need for it
I think we should not support actually creating heirarchies. In addition to
the reduction in code complexity, it will simplify the paradigm presented to
the users. I'm a firm believer in not giving users options they will never
use.
Dave McCracken
|
|
|
|
OpenVZ Forum
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
