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 #6363 is a reply to message #6316] Thu, 14 September 2006 23:13 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Chandra Seetharaman is currently offline  Chandra Seetharaman
Messages: 88
Registered: August 2006
Member
On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 18:22 -0700, Rohit Seth wrote:
<snip>
> >
> > Here are results of some of the benchmarks we have run in the past
> > (April 2005) with CKRM which showed no/negligible performance impact in
> > that scenario.
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ckrm-tech&m=111325064322 305&w=2
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ckrm-tech&m=111385973226 267&w=2
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ckrm-tech&m=111291409731 929&w=2
> > >
>
>
> These are good results. But I still think the cost will increase over a
> period of time as more logic gets added. Any data on microbenchmarks

IMO, overhead may not increase for a _non-user_ of the feature.

> like lmbench.

I think we have run those, but I could not find the results in the
mailing list.
>
> > <snip>
> >
> > > > Not at all. If the container they are interested in is guaranteed, I do
> > > > not see how apps running outside a container would affect them.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Because the kernel (outside the container subsystem) doesn't know of
> >
> > The core resource subsystem (VM subsystem for memory) would know about
> > the guarantees and don't cares, and it would handle it appropriately.
> >
>
> ...meaning hooks in the generic kernel reclaim algorithm. Getting
> something like that in mainline will be at best tricky.

Yes, it does mean doing something in the reclamation path.

>
>
> -rohit
>
--

------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
Chandra Seetharaman | Be careful what you choose....
- sekharan@us.ibm.com | .......you may get it.
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
 
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: Mon Jul 14 00:14:02 GMT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02042 seconds