From: Herbert Poetzl (herbert_at_13thfloor.at)
Date: Mon 01 Sep 2003 - 16:52:26 BST
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 11:39:38AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 10:57:06PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > The virtualisation stuff in vserver is pretty much orthogonal
> > > to the resource management stuff from CKRM.
> > >
> > > I see them as complementary, not competing...
> > havent found any disk limit/quota stuff in CKRM 8-)
> > if I simply missed them, please give me a hint ...
> Indeed, the disk limiting stuff isn't in CKRM, that's what
> your patches are for ;)
*pheew* now I'm really glad 8-) ...
> However, CPU and memory limiting are in CKRM, so there's
> no need to implement those in vserver.
yeah, agreed, we have a implementation in Alexey's
patches, but I never tried to cut it out ...
maybe there is a way to connect context and class
somehow (creating per context/per class rules ...)
I guess I have to have a look at CKRM anyway ...
> "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
> Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
> by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan