Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:15:24 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> To: Pieter de Goeje <pieter@degoeje.nl> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Chris Jones <cdjones-freebsd-hackers@novusordo.net> Subject: Re: Jail-Aware Scheduling Message-ID: <20060612001524.GD739@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <200606111450.31041.pieter@degoeje.nl> References: <1A2863A3-21D6-4F38-AB98-BAB605507095@novusordo.net> <200606111450.31041.pieter@degoeje.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 2006-Jun-11 14:50:30 +0200, Pieter de Goeje wrote: >I suppose by limiting the jail CPU usage you mean that jails contending over >CPU each get their assigned share. But when the system is idle one jail can >get all the CPU it wants. IBM MVS had an interesting alternative approach, which I believe was part of the scheduler: You could place an upper limit on the CPU allocated to a process. From a user perspective, an application would respond in (say) 2 seconds whether the system was completely idle or at normal load. This stopped users complaining that the system was slow as the system got loaded. In the case of jailed systems, it could also prevent (or minimize) traffic analysis of the system by a jailed process. -- Peter Jeremy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060612001524.GD739>