From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753285AbXCMP5I (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 11:57:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753289AbXCMP5I (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 11:57:08 -0400 Received: from MAIL.13thfloor.at ([213.145.232.33]:39751 "EHLO MAIL.13thfloor.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753285AbXCMP5H (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 11:57:07 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:57:06 +0100 From: Herbert Poetzl To: Paul Menage Cc: Paul Jackson , ebiederm@xmission.com, matthltc@us.ibm.com, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, containers@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, winget@google.com, xemul@sw.ru Subject: Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 0/2] resource control file system - aka containers on top of nsproxy! Message-ID: <20070313155706.GO8755@MAIL.13thfloor.at> Mail-Followup-To: Paul Menage , Paul Jackson , ebiederm@xmission.com, matthltc@us.ibm.com, ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, containers@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, winget@google.com, xemul@sw.ru References: <6599ad830703071857yf711921ja3440c4276bbe58e@mail.gmail.com> <45EF83CB.9080903@vilain.net> <1173334209.13172.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070309010628.GE4506@MAIL.13thfloor.at> <45F27503.1020108@vilain.net> <20070311141555.9951b7ba.pj@sgi.com> <6599ad830703120300x63ca5732wfe865f76cb5125a9@mail.gmail.com> <20070312232143.GC6832@MAIL.13thfloor.at> <6599ad830703121925p7049db95nccedfc32609e6ae6@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6599ad830703121925p7049db95nccedfc32609e6ae6@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 07:25:48PM -0700, Paul Menage wrote: > On 3/12/07, Herbert Poetzl wrote: > > > > why? you simply enter that specific space and > > use the existing mechanisms (netlink, proc, whatever) > > to retrieve the information with _existing_ tools, > > That's assuming that you're using network namespace virtualization, or isolation :) > with each group of tasks in a separate namespace. correct ... > What if you don't want the virtualization overhead, just the > accounting? there should be no 'virtualization' overhead, and what do you want to account for, if not by a group of tasks? maybe I'm missing the grouping condition here, but I assume you assign tasks to the accounting containers note: network isolation is not supposed to add overhead compared to the host system (at least not measureable overhead) best, Herbert > Paul > _______________________________________________ > Containers mailing list > Containers@lists.osdl.org > https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/containers