Hello, Vivek. On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 02:07:54PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > I am curious that why are you planning to provide capability of controller > specific view of hierarchy. To me it sounds pretty close to having > separate hierarchies per controller. Just that it is a little more > restricted configuration. I think it's a lot less crazy and gives us a way to bind a resource to a set of controller cgroups regardless which task is looking at it, which is something we're sorely missing now. > IOW, who is is the user of this functionality and who is asking for it. > Can we go all out where all controllers have only one hierarchy view. I think the issue is that controllers inherently have overhead and behavior alterations depending on the tree organization. At least from the usage I see from google which uses nested cgroups extensively, at least that level of flexibility seems necessary. In addition, for some resources, granularity beyond certain point simply doesn't work. Per-service granularity might make sense for cpu but applying it by default would be silly for blkio. Thanks. -- tejun _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
