OpenVZ Forum


Home » Mailing lists » Devel » [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added user memory)
Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added user memory) [message #6325 is a reply to message #6311] Thu, 14 September 2006 07:53 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Pavel Emelianov is currently offline  Pavel Emelianov
Messages: 1149
Registered: September 2006
Senior Member
Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 12:06 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
>
>> Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 14:48 +0400, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> I do not think it is that simple since
>>>>> - there is typically more than one class I want to set guarantee to
>>>>> - I will not able to use both limit and guarantee
>>>>> - Implementation will not be work-conserving.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, How would you configure the following in your model ?
>>>>>
>>>>> 5 classes: Class A(10, 40), Class B(20, 100), Class C (30, 100), Class D
>>>>> (5, 100), Class E(15, 50); (class_name(guarantee, limit))
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> What's the total memory amount on the node? Without it it's hard to make
>>>> any
>>>> guarantee.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I wrote the example treating them as %, so 100 would be the total amount
>>> of memory.
>>>
>>>
>> OK. Then limiting must be done this way (unreclaimable limit/total limit)
>> A (15/40)
>> B (25/100)
>> C (35/100)
>> D (10/100)
>> E (20/50)
>> In this case each group will receive it's guarantee for sure.
>>
>> E.g. even if A, B, E and D will eat all it's unreclaimable memory then
>> we'll have
>> 100 - 15 - 25 - 20 - 10 = 30% of memory left (maybe after reclaiming) which
>> is perfectly enough for C's guarantee.
>>
>
> How did you arrive at the +5 number ?
>
I've solved a linear equations set :)
> 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.
>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> "Limit only" approach works for DoS prevention. But for providing QoS
>>>>> you would need guarantee.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> You may not provide guarantee on physycal resource for a particular group
>>>> without limiting its usage by other groups. That's my major idea.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I agree with that, but the other way around (i.e provide guarantee for
>>> everyone by imposing limits on everyone) is what I am saying is not
>>> possible.
>>>
>> Then how do you make sure that memory WILL be available when the group needs
>> it without limiting the others in a proper way?
>>
>
> You could limit others only if you _know_ somebody is not getting what
> they are supposed to get (based on guarantee).
>
I don't understand your idea. Limit does _not_ imply anything - it's
just a limit.
You may limit anything to anyone w/o bothering the consequences.
Guarantee implies that the resource you guarantee will be available and
this "will be" is something not that easy.

So I repeat my question - how can you be sure that these X megabytes you
guarantee to some group won't be used by others so that you won't be able
to reclaim them?
 
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
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
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: Acks for 3 pid-namespace patches
Next Topic: [Patch 01/05]- Containers: Documentation on using containers
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Aug 28 11:54:47 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.13738 seconds