> :That has nothing to do with it. Not for cpu usage. If you have two users > that> :are using all the CPU they can they ought to get 50% of the CPU each. > Even if> :one of the users have 1 process and the other have 100 processes. > : > :Sun has a product for this, Solaris Resource Manager. > > ... and if one user is *supposed* to be running all those processes, then > what? Oh, let me guess: Now you are supposed to tune each user's account > independantly. For a system with general user accounts, this is a burden > on the sysop.
? Then that user continue to run all those processes, but won't take a bigger share of the resources than any other user. This is not diffrent from one process not using all the CPU when there are other processes that need CPU. > If one can't control one's users, one has no business managing them. The > last thing FreeBSD needs is some overly complex, sophisticated scheduler > designed to help bozo sysops stay on their feet. You can't manage users today as you don't have anyting good to control them with. We have that for processes, so you can manage processes. This helps for runaway daemons and things like that to. (The Web server gets 75% and the rest to the sql server for example). Is it worth the trouble to implement? Maybe not. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
