Paul Menage wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 1:03 AM, Andrea Righi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Could you not either:
>>>
>>> - include these two extra fields in res_counter?
>>> - include res_counter as the first field in a res_counter_ratelimit?
>> The second solution would save some space if the "ratelimit" part is not
>> used.
>
> Having a "policy" field in res_counter seems like it might be reusable
> as something for other non-ratelimited res_counters. And even if it's
> not, the memory overhead of a couple of extra fields in a res_counter
> is trivial compared to the overhead of resource isolation anyway.
>
> So my first approach to this would be just extend res_counter, and
> then split them apart later if it turns out that they really do need
> mutually incompatible code/handlers.
Yes! I agree
--
Balbir
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
