Lennart Poettering <mzxre...@0pointer.de> writes: > On Mon, 10.10.11 13:59, Eric W. Biederman (ebied...@xmission.com) wrote:
>> My list of things that still have work left to do looks like: >> - cgroups. It is not safe to create a new hierarchies with groups >> that are in existing hierarchies. So cgroups don't work. > > Well, for systemd they actually work quite fine since systemd will > always place its own cgroups below the cgroup it is started in. cgroups > hence make these things nicely stackable. > > In fact, most folks involved in cgroups userspace have agreed to these > rules now: > > http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PaxControlGroups Wow. Are cgroups really that complicated to use? A list of rules a page long on what you have to do to make them useful and non-conflict. Something seems off. Perhaps we need a rule don't mount multiple controllers in the same hierarchy. Eric ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-oct _______________________________________________ Lxc-devel mailing list Lxc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxc-devel
