From: Herbert Poetzl (herbert_at_13thfloor.at)
Date: Wed 24 Aug 2005 - 14:26:41 BST
On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 03:03:28PM +0200, Helmut Wollmersdorfer wrote:
> Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> >On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 01:55:17AM +0200, Helmut Wollmersdorfer wrote:
> >(I just added that one :)
> I added a basic example and linked this page.
> To be continued ...
(yeah, I know, I slightly modified it :)
> 1. Question:
> I do not understand the 'soft' and 'min' limits.
> Does 'soft' mean:
> The kernel gives priority on requests within 'soft' against other requests?
> Does 'min' mean the highest priority?
> Or does it really allocate this 'min' - which makes no sense IMHO.
currently soft and min are not implemented
in the (near?) future soft will become the point
at which a context will get penalized for using
more resources than allowed, at hard it will
not be allowed to use more ...
the minimum was just an idea to help userspace
to get the resource management right, but for
certain limits it might (again in the future)
make sense to 'reserve' resources, at least when
they are needed ...
> 2. Question:
> Is there something to mention about daemons which use memory mapping
> extensively like 'dictd'?
> 3. Question:
> As I understand, a vserver uses the swap space of the host context?
> Thus it makes sense to restrict VM - right?
yes, it makes sense to restrict that, and we
might also implement 'swap-like' behaviour in
the future ...
> Enough boring questions for today;-)
> Maybe we can spend ~1 hour @debienna for f2f Q&A in future, and
> motivate greek0 too ...
I'm pretty sure we can ...
> Helmut Wollmersdorfer
> Vserver mailing list
Vserver mailing list