On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 14:25:33 +0100 (CET) > For a customer the main reason to use guarantee is to be sure that > some pages of a job remain in memory when the system is low on free > memory. This should be true even for a job in group/container A with
That actually doesn't appear a very useful definition. There are two reasons for wanting memory guarantees #1 To be sure a user can't toast the entire box but just their own compartment (eg web hosting) #2 To ensure all apps continue to make progress The simple approach doesn't seem to work for either. There is a threshold above which #1 and #2 are the same thing, below that trying to keep a few pages in memory will thrash not make progress and will harm overall behaviour thus failing to solve #1 or #2. At that point you have to decide whether what you have is a misconfiguration or whether the system should be prepared to do temporary cycling overcommits so containers take it in turn to make progress when overcommitted. > If the limit is a "hard limit" then we have implemented reservation and > this is too strict. Thats fundamentally a judgement based on your particular workload and constraints. If I am web hosting then I don't generally care if my end users compartment blows up under excess load, I care that the other 200 customers using the box don't suffer and all phone me to complain. Alan ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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