Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 18 Jun 2006 17:49:20 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] CPU controllers? |
| |
Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Sat, 2006-06-17 at 23:42 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > >>On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 16:11:18 +1000 >>Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote: > > >>>Again, I don't care about the solutions at this stage. I want to know >>>what the problem is. Please? >> >>Isolation. To prevent one group of processes from damaging the performance >>of other groups, by providing manageability of the resource consumption of >>each group. There are plenty of applications of this, not just >>server-consolidation-via-server-virtualisation. > > > Scheduling contexts do sound useful. They're easily defeated though, as > evolution mail demonstrates to me every time it's GUI hangs and I see > that a nice 19 find is running, eating very little CPU, but effectively > DoSing evolution nonetheless (journal). I wonder how often people who > tried to distribute CPU would likewise be stymied by other resources.
Not entirely infrequently. Which is why it really doesn't seem like it could be useful from a security point of view without a *huge* amount of work and complexity... and even from a guaranteed-service point of view, it still seems (to me) like a pretty big and complex problem.
As a check box for marketing it sounds pretty cool though, I admit ;)
-- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |