On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 11:39:38AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Herbert Poetzl wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 10:57:06PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > > The virtualisation stuff in vserver is pretty much orthogonal > > > to the resource management stuff from CKRM. > > > > > > I see them as complementary, not competing... > > > > havent found any disk limit/quota stuff in CKRM 8-) > > if I simply missed them, please give me a hint ... > > Indeed, the disk limiting stuff isn't in CKRM, that's what > your patches are for ;)
*pheew* now I'm really glad 8-) ... > However, CPU and memory limiting are in CKRM, so there's > no need to implement those in vserver. yeah, agreed, we have a implementation in Alexey's patches, but I never tried to cut it out ... maybe there is a way to connect context and class somehow (creating per context/per class rules ...) I guess I have to have a look at CKRM anyway ... best, Herbert > Rik > -- > "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. > Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, > by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
