On 9/21/06, Chandra Seetharaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > But, there's no reason that the OpenVZ resource control mechanisms > > couldn't be hooked into a generic process container mechanism along > > with cpusets and RG. > > Isn't that one of the things we are trying to avoid (each one having > their own solution, especially when we _can_ have a common solution).
Can we actually have a single common solution that works for everyone, no matter what their needs? It's already apparent that there are multiple different and subtly incompatible definitions of what "memory controller" means and needs to do. Maybe these can be resolved - but maybe it's better to have, say, two simple but very different memory controllers that the user can pick between, rather than one big and complicated one that tries to please everyone. Paul ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ ckrm-tech mailing list https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ckrm-tech
