> From my point of view, it's not very good that MonD uses RSS data
> only if memory overcommitment is allowed while hbal always uses the
> data. (Of course, only if corresponding option is passed, but it
> doesn't eliminate the problem). Maybe, it would be better to use RSS
> data here only if memory overcommitment is allowed even if the
> --mond-kvm-rss option passed.

The difference I see between maintd and hbal is that maintd has to
take reasonable decissions in an unattended way, whereas hbal is the
all-flexible tool that can also be used for exploration (e.g., how
would the cluster look like, if we took memory load into account
even though we don't oversubscribe? What if we took a different
weight?). Also note that the default behaviour of hbal is "make
suggestions but don't do anything to the cluster" anyway. So, while
maintd as to have a strategy that is useful in most cases and backwards
compatible, I don't want to take away the flexibility of hbal. Also note,
that you can always get the right behaviour by choosing the correct options.

-- 
Klaus Aehlig
Google Germany GmbH, Dienerstr. 12, 80331 Muenchen
Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Matthew Scott Sucherman, Paul Terence Manicle

Reply via email to