Hi Balbir, Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > * Ryo Tsuruta <ryov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2009-09-08 12:01:19]: > > > I think there are some advantages to dm-ioband. That's why I post > > dm-ioband to the mailing list. > > > > - dm-ioband supports not only proportional weight policy but also rate > > limiting policy. Besides, new policies can be added to dm-ioband if > > a user wants to control bandwidth by his or her own policy. > > - The dm-ioband driver can be replaced without stopping the system by > > using device-mapper's facility. It's easy to maintain. > > - dm-ioband can use without cgroup. (I remember Vivek said it's not an > > advantage.) > > But don't you need page_cgroup for IO tracking? It is not necessary when controlling bandwidth on a per partition basis or on a IO thread basis like Xen blkback kernel thread. Here are configration examples. http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/ioband/wiki/dm-ioband/man/examples Thanks, Ryo Tsuruta -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
