>>>> Sure! You can check OpenVZ project (http://openvz.org) for example >>>> of required resource management. BTW, I must agree with other people >>>> here who noticed that per-process resource management is really >>>> useless and hard to use :( >> >> >> I totally agree. > > > "nice" seems to be doing quite nicely :-) I'm sorry, but nice never looked "nice" to me. Have you ever tried to "nice" apache server which spawns 500 processes/threads on a loaded machine? With nice you _can't_ impose limits or priority on the whole "apache". The more apaches you have the more useless their priorites and nices are...
> To me this capping functionality is a similar functionality to that > provided by "nice" and all that's needed to make it useful is a command > (similar to "nice") that runs tasks with caps applied. To that end I've > written a small script (attached) that does this. As this is something > that a user might like to combine with "nice" the command has an option > for setting "nice" as well as caps. > > Usage: > withcap [options] command [arguments ...] > withcap -h > Options: > [-c <CPU rate soft cap>] > [-C <CPU rate hard cap>] > [-n <nice value>] > > -c Set CPU usage rate soft cap > -C Set CPU usage rate hard cap > -n Set nice value > -h Display this help the same for this. you can't limit a _user_, only his processes. Today I have 1 task and 20% limit is ok, tomorrow I have 10 tasks and this 20% limits changes nothing in the system. Kirill _______________________________________________ ckrm-tech mailing list https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
