On 7/10/07, Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Kirill, Serge, et al, Is it fair to say then that Paul Menage's containers are primarily for the purposes of managing resources, while namespaces are for the purposes of managing identifiers?
Sort of - but one thing that we're trying to figure out how to do nicely is integrate namespaces into the container filesystem (this was the purpose of the post_clone() container API callback) so that we can both get a filesystem view of task namespaces, and combine namespaces with other process container subsystems.
We've got some resources, like cpu cycles, memory bytes, network bandwidth, that we want to allocate and account for differentially by groups of tasks -- that's Menage's containers.
Plus things that aren't necessarily resource controllers, such as the container freezer, or permissions on network ports, or userspace OOM handlers. I don't think that lumping all of these in together as "resource containers" is the right thing to do.
virtualization efforts, of which my cpusets is the granddaddy example, being generalized by Paul Menage with his container patches. The other work is, as Serge actually termed it in the body of his post, better called 'namespaces'.
Purely within the kernel, yes. The more general encompassing effort to have a combined kernel/userspace solution for virtual servers is also referred to as "containers". (And to be fair that term was already in use when I started using the term "process containers" to refer to the specific framework in the kernel that handles process tracking). Paul _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
