From: Herbert Poetzl (herbert_at_13thfloor.at)
Date: Fri 23 Jul 2004 - 00:46:24 BST
On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 06:44:48PM -0400, Marc E. Fiuczynski wrote:
> Hi Liam,
>
> I've tried to add myself to the vserver mailing lists again. But I have not
> received any email from the list management program (or the list admin). In
> responding to this email or the thread, please cc it to me as well.
>
> >As far as I can tell, integration would be easy enough
> >to do if you're simply adding a rule to your RBCE to
> >classify based on the Context ID of a process. Also,
> >in the vserver context, subclasses would be useful
>
> This part is basically done. It is the minimum level of integration
> necessary to map vservers into CKRM classes.
>
> I asked Herbert (Bertl) on the IRC whether this would be something of
> interest. I was glad that he liked the idea. From what I gather, the idea
> for this type of integration was tossed around before.
after all, at the time CKRM was born, linux-vserver
toyed with the idea to use it for the 2.6 release
> Note that except for the addition of Context ID to the RBCE of CKRM, I am
> not suggesting further integration between the two projects. Rather, what I
> am suggesting is that vserver use the CPU and physical memory resource
> controllers from CKRM rather than its own. Over time this would mean that
> vserver would phase out its own support (and possibly code base) for these
> resources.
as soon as there is enough evidence that CKRM can
handle current and future requirements, in a performant
and reliable way, I have no problem to drop the current
resource management from linux-vserver
> CKRM also provides other resource controllers that vserver would
> benefit from. E.g., it has task, socket, and I/O resource controllers. The
> task class is used to limit the number of process a class can have. The
> socket class controls the rate of incoming TCP connections. And the I/O
> class proportionally shares disk bandwidth. From what I gather, vserver does
> not have such resource controllers, right?!
number of processes is supervised and limited by all
linux-vserver branches, the rate of incoming connections
and the disk I/O would be a nice addition ...
> Of course, there are resource controllers that vserver has that are not yet
> available in CKRM. The goal would be to port those over to the CKRM
> framework. So, my basic questions are: What resource controllers are there
> in vserver that are not yet in CKRM? And, is there anyone interested
> (besides me) in porting those over to CKRM?
http://www.linux-vserver.org/index.php?page=Linux-VServer-Paper
and keep in mind that we are currently changing the network
layer to become more context aware (ngn) ...
thanks,
Herbert
> Cheers,
> Marc
>
> _______________________________________________
> Vserver mailing list
> Vserver_at_list.linux-vserver.org
> http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
_______________________________________________
Vserver mailing list
Vserver_at_list.linux-vserver.org
http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver