Re: [Lse-tech] Re: A common layer for Accounting packages

Andrew Morton
2005-02-23T07:21:10Z

Kaigai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com> wrote:
>
> The common agreement for the method of dealing with process aggregation
> has not been constructed yet, I understood. And, we will not able to
> integrate each process aggregation model because of its diverseness.
>
> For example, a process which belong to JOB-A must not belong any other
> 'JOB-X' in CSA-model. But, In ELSA-model, a process in BANK-B can concurrently
> belong to BANK-B1 which is a child of BANK-B.
>
> And, there are other defferences:
> Whether a process not to belong to any process-aggregation is permitted or not ?
> Whether a process-aggregation should be inherited to child process or not ?
> (There is possibility not to be inherited in a rule-based process aggregation like CKRM)
>
> Some process-aggregation model have own philosophy and implemantation,
> so it's hard to integrate. Thus, I think that common 'fork/exec/exit' event handling
> framework to implement any kinds of process-aggregation.

We really want to avoid doing such stuff in-kernel if at all possible, of
course.

Is it not possible to implement the fork/exec/exit notifications to
userspace so that a daemon can track the process relationships and perform
aggregation based upon individual tasks' accounting? That's what one of
the accounting systems is proposing doing, I believe.

(In fact, why do we even need the notifications? /bin/ps can work this
stuff out).