Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:43:40 +0100 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Thomas.Sparrevohn@btinternet.com Cc: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net>, Ian FREISLICH <if@hetzner.co.za>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [TEST/REVIEW] CPU accounting patches Message-ID: <84017.1138351420@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 27 Jan 2006 02:32:10 GMT." <200601270232.12528.Thomas.Sparrevohn@btinternet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200601270232.12528.Thomas.Sparrevohn@btinternet.com>, Thomas Sparre vohn writes: >On Thursday 26 January 2006 06:06, Ian FREISLICH wrote: > >> >> I wonder how many people still bill for CPU time? I'd go for the >> faster context switches. >> > >Almost all major ITO's providers - From SUN, HP, IBM, EDS etc. has offerings >that in some shape or other uses a "Utility model" based upon some sort of >financial model based upon actual CPU/IO etc. usage - It is a major area now >and provides one of the corner stones in the movement towards "Public Utility >models" Should we also add that all these initiatives are spectacular commercial failures because users hate to buy rubberband by the inch ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?84017.1138351420>