Re: [ckrm-tech] [RFC][PATCH] UBC: user resource beancounters

[Kirill Korotaev <dev@sw.ru>]

Chandra Seetharaman wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-08-24 at 10:27 -0700, Rohit Seth wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
>>>What do you mean by "resource management part for non-container world
>>>already exist ?
>>>
>>>It does not. CKRM/Resource Groups is trying to do that, but is not in
>>>Linus's tree.
>>>
>>
>>Please, non-container is the environment that exist today in Linux.
>>Actually cpuset does provide some part of it.  But beyond that no.  
> 
> 
> cpuset provides resource _isolation_, not necessarily resource
> management.
> 
> 
>>But then we are all using different terminology like beancounters,
>>containers, resource groups and now non-containers...
>>
> 
> 
> <snip>
> 
>>>>I'm sure when container support gets in then for the above scenario it
>>>>will read -1 ...
>>>
>>>So, how can one get the list of tasks belonging to a resource group in
>>>that case ?
>>>
>>...and that brings to the starting question...why do you need it?
> 
> 
> Like I said earlier, there is _no_ other way to get the list of tasks
> belonging to a resource group.
> 
> 
>>Commands like ps and top will show appropriate container number for each
>>task.
> 
> 
> There is _no_ container number in the non-container environment (or it
> will be same for _all_ tasks).

Chandra, virtual container number is essentially the same as user id
in non-container environment. UBC were desgined for _users_ first.
Containers were just the first environment which started to use it widely.

And I really disagree when you say that non-container usecase is
a superset of container usecase. I believe it is vice versa, since
in container usecase you have a _full_ environment with root user and need
more resources to be taken into account.

Thanks,
Kirill