From: Herbert Poetzl (herbert_at_13thfloor.at)
Date: Tue 23 Nov 2004 - 22:29:25 GMT
On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 07:39:26PM +0100, Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Tue, 23 November 2004 19:08:50 +0100, Jörn Engel wrote:
> > I love it when someone else already did the work. ;)
> Except when it's only partial. If implementation matches
> documentation, the fixed lower bound is 0 (zero). That's pretty low.
> Most people want to say something like "Ssh will always get 5% of cpu,
> no matter how many forkbombs explode. And the administrator's shell
> will inherit those 5%."
> Ok, not many people know they want to say it, but some may learn the
> hard way over time. ;)
yep, but taking care that overbooking doesn't
happen can be done in userspace, literally ...
so a 'minimum' of available resources can be
guaranteeed only if you limit all other contexts
to 1.0 - Sum[max], which in turn, is sufficient
unless you have 'better' suggestions to solve
> joern_at_limerick:/tmp> cat _
> head _>>_
> . _&. _
> joern_at_limerick:/tmp> . _
> Have fun!
> Fancy algorithms are slow when n is small, and n is usually small.
> Fancy algorithms have big constants. Until you know that n is
> frequently going to be big, don't get fancy.
> -- Rob Pike
> Vserver mailing list
Vserver mailing list