* Chris Friesen <cfriesen@xxxxxxxxxx> [2009-06-04 23:09:22]: > Balbir Singh wrote: > > > But then there is no other way to make a *guarantee*, guarantees come > > at a cost of idling resources, no? Can you show me any other > > combination that will provide the guarantee and without idling the > > system for the specified guarantees? > > The example given was two 10% guaranteed groups and one best-effort > group. Why would this require idling resources? > > If I have a hog in each group, the requirements would be met if the > groups got 33, 33, and 33. (Or 10/10/80, for that matter.) If the > second and third groups go idle, why not let the first group use 100% of > the cpu? > > The only hard restriction is that the sum of the guarantees must be less > than 100%. > Chris, I just responded to a variation of this, I think that some of this could be handled during design. I just sent out the email a few minutes ago. Could you look at that and respond. -- Balbir -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
