OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » containers development plans
Re: containers development plans [message #14767 is a reply to message #14760] Tue, 10 July 2007 07:38 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Paul Jackson is currently offline  Paul Jackson
Messages: 157
Registered: February 2006
Senior Member
Paul M wrote:
> How about if we adopt "process containers" or "task containers" as the
> term for the generic container framework, to distinguish from more
> general user-space containers?

As I just spent the last hour writing in another reply (not noticing
your message in my queue), I suspect that these are not best called
'process' (or 'task') containers, but rather 'resource' containers.

You provide what look like more good examples of why this is so,
with your mention of various proposals for managing network traffic,
which (I'm unsure of this) seem not to bind per-task, but per-link
or some such.

Do the various 'subsystems' that you're thinking of correspond to the
various resources that we're virtualizing?

Separate question -- what do you mean by 'the generic container
framework' ... I'm clueless.

--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401
 
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: [RFC][-mm PATCH 2/8] Memory controller containers setup (v3)
Next Topic: containers development plans (July 20 version)
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Sep 18 03:30:26 GMT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04966 seconds