Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 4 Aug 2006 17:11:09 +0530 | From | Srivatsa Vaddagiri <> | Subject | Re: [RFC, PATCH 0/5] Going forward with Resource Management - A cpu controller |
| |
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 10:49:10AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > I think the risk is that OpenVZ has all the controls and resource > managers we need, while CKRM is still more research-ish. I find the > OpenVZ code much clearer, cleaner and complete at the moment, although > also much more conservative in its approach to solving problems.
I think it would be nice to compare first the features provided by ckrm and openvz at some point and agree upon the minimum common features we need to have as we go forward. For instance I think Openvz assumes that tasks do not need to move between containers (task-groups), whereas ckrm provides this flexibility for workload management. This may have some effect on the controller/interface design, no?
-- Regards, vatsa - 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/
| |