On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:13:30 +0400If you mean user memory, then it is possible to set
Kirill Korotaev <dev@xxxxx> wrote:
I was more thinking about (for example) user land physical memory limit
for that bean counter. If the limits are going down, then the system
call should try to flush out page cache pages or swap out anonymous
memory. But you are right that it won't be possible in all cases, like
for in kernel memory limits.
Such kind of memory management is less efficient than the one making decisions based on global shortages and global LRU alogrithm.
I also was quite surprised that openvz appears to have no way of
constraining a container's memory usage. "I want to run this bunch of
processes in a 4.5GB container".
why do you assume that it is always an operator who controls the applicationsThe problem here is that doing swap out takes more expensive disk I/O
influencing other users.
A well-set-up container would presumably be working against its own
spindle(s). If the operator has gone to all the trouble of isolating a job
from the system's other jobs, he'd be pretty dumb to go and let all the
"isolated" jobs share a stinky-slow resource like a disk.
But yes, swap is a problem. To do this properly we'd need a way of sayingyep, this is possible with page beancounters as it tracks user pages.
"this container here uses that swap device over there".