From: Mike Waychison <mikew@google.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>,
Linux Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] CPU hard limits
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 14:32:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A283D72.6070603@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A27BBCA.5020606@redhat.com>
Avi Kivity wrote:
> Bharata B Rao wrote:
>> 2. Need for hard limiting CPU resource
>> --------------------------------------
>> - Pay-per-use: In enterprise systems that cater to multiple clients/customers
>> where a customer demands a certain share of CPU resources and pays only
>> that, CPU hard limits will be useful to hard limit the customer's job
>> to consume only the specified amount of CPU resource.
>> - In container based virtualization environments running multiple containers,
>> hard limits will be useful to ensure a container doesn't exceed its
>> CPU entitlement.
>> - Hard limits can be used to provide guarantees.
>>
> How can hard limits provide guarantees?
Hard limits are useful and desirable in situations where we would like
to maintain deterministic behavior.
Placing a hard cap on the cpu usage of a given task group (and
configuring such that this cpu time is not overcommited) on a system
allows us to create a hard guarantee that throughput for that task group
will not fluctuate as other workloads are added and removed on the system.
Cache use and bus bandwidth in a multi-workload environment can still
cause a performance deviation, but these are second order compared to
the cpu scheduling guarantees themselves.
Mike Waychison
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-04 21:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-04 5:36 [RFC] CPU hard limits Bharata B Rao
2009-06-04 12:19 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-04 21:32 ` Mike Waychison [this message]
2009-06-05 3:03 ` Bharata B Rao
2009-06-05 3:33 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-05 4:37 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-05 4:44 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-05 4:49 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-05 5:09 ` Chris Friesen
2009-06-05 5:13 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-05 5:10 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-05 5:21 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-05 5:27 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-05 5:31 ` Bharata B Rao
2009-06-05 6:01 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-05 8:16 ` Bharata B Rao
2009-06-07 6:04 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-07 16:14 ` Bharata B Rao
2009-06-05 9:39 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-05 13:14 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-05 13:42 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-07 6:09 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-05 14:54 ` Chris Friesen
2009-06-07 6:10 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-05 9:24 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-05 6:03 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-05 6:32 ` Bharata B Rao
2009-06-05 12:57 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-05 5:16 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-05 5:20 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-05 3:07 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-05 8:53 ` Paul Menage
2009-06-05 9:27 ` Bharata B Rao
2009-06-05 9:32 ` Paul Menage
2009-06-05 9:48 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-06-05 9:51 ` Paul Menage
2009-06-05 9:59 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-06-05 10:03 ` Paul Menage
2009-06-08 8:50 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2009-06-05 9:36 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-05 9:48 ` Paul Menage
2009-06-05 9:55 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-05 9:57 ` Paul Menage
2009-06-05 10:02 ` Paul Menage
2009-06-05 11:32 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2009-06-05 12:18 ` Paul Menage
2009-06-07 10:11 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2009-06-07 15:35 ` Balbir Singh
2009-06-08 4:37 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2009-06-05 14:44 ` Chris Friesen
2009-06-05 13:02 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-05 13:43 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-06-05 14:45 ` Chris Friesen
2009-06-05 9:02 ` Reinhard Tartler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4A283D72.6070603@google.com \
--to=mikew@google.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=xemul@openvz.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox