On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 04:38:47PM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 10:41:34AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-02-22 at 11:57 -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > > > > Again, it does not mean I am advocating flat hiearchy. I am just wondering > > > in case of fully nested hierarchies (task at same level as groups), how > > > does one explain it to a layman user who understands things in terms of > > > % of resources. > > > > If your complete control is % based then I would assume its a % of a %. > > Simple enough. > > But % of % will vary dynamically and not be static. So if root has got > 100% of resources and we want 25% of that for a group, then hierarchy > might look as follows. It is complex but semantics is pretty well defined. It should behave exactly the same as HTB. Whether the complexity would be justifiable is a different issue. Thanks. -- tejun _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
