On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 01:53:15AM -0700, Paul Menage wrote: > This claim (and the subsequent long thread it generated on how limits > can provide guarantees) confused me a bit. > > Why do we need limits to provide guarantees when we can already > provide guarantees via shares? I think the interval over which we need guarantee matters here. Shares can generally provide guaranteed share of resource over longer (sometimes minutes) intervals. For high-priority bursty workloads, the latency in achieving guaranteed resource usage matters. By having hard-limits, we are "reserving" (potentially idle) slots where the high-priority group can run and claim its guaranteed share almost immediately. - vatsa -- 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
