| Re: [ckrm-tech] [patch00/05]: Containers(V2)- Introduction [message #6754 is a reply to message #6719] |
Thu, 21 September 2006 22:09  |
Paul Menage
Messages: 642
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 9/21/06, Chandra Seetharaman <sekharan@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > But, there's no reason that the OpenVZ resource control mechanisms
> > couldn't be hooked into a generic process container mechanism along
> > with cpusets and RG.
>
> Isn't that one of the things we are trying to avoid (each one having
> their own solution, especially when we _can_ have a common solution).
Can we actually have a single common solution that works for everyone,
no matter what their needs? It's already apparent that there are
multiple different and subtly incompatible definitions of what "memory
controller" means and needs to do. Maybe these can be resolved - but
maybe it's better to have, say, two simple but very different memory
controllers that the user can pick between, rather than one big and
complicated one that tries to please everyone.
Paul
|
|
|
|
OpenVZ Forum
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
