Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH] BC: resource beancounters (v4) (added usermemory)

[Balbir Singh]

Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-09-05 at 19:02 +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> > Core Resource Beancounters (BC) + kernel/user memory control.
> >
> > BC allows to account and control consumption
> > of kernel resources used by group of processes. 
>
> Hi Kirill, 
>
> I've honestly lost track of these discussions along the way, so I hope
> you don't mind summarizing a bit.
>
> Do these patches help with accounting for anything other than memory?
> Will we need new user/kernel interfaces for cpu, i/o bandwidth, etc...?
>
> Have you given any thought to the possibility that a task might need to
> move between accounting contexts?  That has certainly been a
> "requirement" pushed on to CKRM for a long time, and the need goes
> something like this:
>
> 1. A system runs a web server, which services several virtual domains
> 2. that web server receives a request for foo.com
> 3. the web server switches into foo.com's accounting context
> 4. the web server reads things from disk, allocates some memory, and
>    makes a database request.
> 5. the database receives the request, and switches into foo.com's
>    accounting context, and charges foo.com for its resource use
> etc...
>
> So, the goal is to run _one_ copy of an application on a system, but
> account for its resources in a much more fine-grained way than at the
> application level.
>
> I think we can probably use beancounters for this, if we do not worry
> about migrating _existing_ charges when we change accounting context.
> Does that make sense?
>
> -- Dave

This is much better stated than I did. Thanks!

--

	Balbir Singh,
	Linux Technology Center,
	IBM Software Labs
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/