Re: [ckrm-tech] [PATCH 0/2] resource control file system - aka containers on top of nsproxy!

Sam Vilain
2007-03-10T09:06:36Z

Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 11:44:58PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
>> I really don't much care as long as we don't start redefining
>> container as something else. I think the IBM guys took it from
>> solaris originally which seems to define a zone as a set of
>> isolated processes (for us all separate namespaces). And a container
>> as a set of as a zone that uses resource control. Not exactly how
>> we have been using the term but close enough not to confuse someone.
>>
>> As long as we don't go calling the individual subsystems or the
>> process groups they need to function a container I really don't care.
>> [...]
>> Resource groups at least for subset of subsystems that aren't
>> namespaces sounds reasonable. Heck resource group, resource
>> controller, resource subsystem, resource just about anything seems
>> sane to me.
>>
>> The important part is that we find a vocabulary without doubly
>> defined words so we can communicate and a small common set we can
>> agree on so people can work on and implement the individual
>> resource controllers/groups, and get the individual pieces merged
>> as they are reading.
>>
>
> from my personal PoV the following would be fine:
>
> spaces (for the various 'spaces')
>
> - similar enough to the old namespace
> - can be easily used with prefix/postfix
> like in pid_space, mnt_space, uts_space etc
> - AFAIK, it is not used yet for anything else
>
> container (for resource accounting/limits)
>
> - has the 'containment' principle built in :)
> - is used in similar ways in other solutions
> - sounds similar to context (easy to associate)
>
> note: I'm also fine with other names, as long as
> we find some useable vocabulary soon, [...]

I like these a lot, particularly in that "mount space" could be a
reasonable replacement for "namespace".

As a result of this discussion, I see the sense in Paul Menage's
original choice of term.

There's just one problem. We'd have to rename the mailing list to
"spaces and containers" :-)

Sam.