Balbir Singh wrote: > On Jan 11, 2008 4:15 AM, Andrea Righi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Allow to limit the bandwidth of I/O-intensive processes, like backup >> tools running in background, large files copy, checksums on huge files, >> etc. >> >> This kind of processes can noticeably impact the system responsiveness >> for some time and playing with tasks' priority is not always an >> acceptable solution. >> >> This patch allows to specify a maximum I/O rate in sectors per second >> for each single process via /proc/<PID>/io_throttle (default is zero, >> that specify no limit). >> >> Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hi, Andrea, > > We have been thinking of doing control group based I/O control. I have > not reviewed your patch in detail. I can suggest looking at openvz's > IO controller. I/O bandwidth control is definitely interesting. How > did you test your solution?
I don't have meaningful values right now, just did some quick tests with my pc. Regarding openvz it seems to use the CFQ priority-based approach (with the 3 priority classes: real time, best effort and idle class). The interesting feature is that it allows to set a priority for each process container, but AFAIK it doesn't allow to "partition" the bandwidth between different containers (that would be a nice feature IMHO). For example it would be great to be able to define per-container limits, like assign 10MB/s for processes in container A, 30MB/s to container B, 20MB/s to container C, etc. -Andrea -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/