Re: 2.0, loggings, cpu quotas, 2.1 issues, etc.

Jeff Johnson (trn@gate.net)
Wed, 12 Jun 1996 08:42:12 +0000 (GMT)


On Wed, 12 Jun 1996, Alan Cox wrote:

> > > Make that a chargeable group and we get the ability to partition a big
> > > machine up by department and to do sensible charging schemes. For big number
> > > crunchers that is an issue.
> > A wonderful idea. Would imposing a memory usage quota be a extrememly
> > difficult task, Alan?
>
> I can see some semantics issues like who do you charge for a shared page,
> both, half each, ... (I like half each as it will encourage people to run
> two of the same job at once as its cheaper on machine resources!)
>
> Alan
>

You could always ignore shared memory to get this out the door. :-)

--
Jeff Johnson               GCS d- s: !a C+++ UA++(+++) P+ L+
trn@gate.net               E---- W+++ N+++(+++++) K- w(+) O(-)
KE4QWX                     M- V-(--) PS+ PE Y++ PGP+++(+++++) t- 
http://www.gate.net/~trn   5 X+++(+++++) R tv+ b++ DI-- D G++ e* !h r y?
Nerdity Test = 66%         Hacker Test = 45%
1024/3397E001 1995/06/10   5B 92 8B 34 84 E9 42 26  DC FB F7 C4 1E 0E 80 29