4 ms·

You're in luck -- I've done a screencast on cgroups where I explain what they are and how you can use them @ http://sysadmincasts.com/episodes/14-introduction-t

You're in luck -- I've done a screencast on cgroups where I explain what they are and how you can use them @ http://sysadmincasts.com/episodes/14-introduction-to-linux-control-groups-cgroups http://sysadmincasts.com/episodes/14-introduction-to-linux-c... Also, it is all command line at this point, but there are some concepts floating around about creating a gui @ http://mairin.wordpress.com/2011/05/13/ideas-for-a-cgroups-ui/ http://mairin.wordpress.com/2011/05/13/ideas-for-a-cgroups-u...

sandGorgon 13y ago
could you double check your screencast ? My understanding is limited, but I think Systemd ver 205 changes the cgroup interaction methodology - basically systemd is a single point entry into the cgroup api. You cannot touch cgroup any other way except through systemd. FYI - this is not systemd taking arbitrary control but what the upstream kernel recommended. My understanding is that Fedora 20 (which uses systemd 208 ) will be impacted by this, as will most other distros. However jessie is proposing systemd 204, so your method might still work.
- nisa 13y ago
  Is there a reason for this? I'm heavily invested in Ubuntu and I'm also making heavy use of the cgroups API in its current form. Does that mean that I can't use cgroups without systemd in newer kernels? Or do I miss cgroups features? I'm quite happy with the mountable filesystem at the moment. It's scriptable and reasonable flexible and still easy to use for solving my problems.
  - _delirium 13y ago
    Found a discussion here of the changes & rationale here: http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/ControlGroupInterface/ http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/ControlGrou...
    - vidarh 13y ago
      That sounds awful. The idea that systemd vs. another "cgroups owner" changes the API you need to use for interacting with cgroups will effectively impose a compatibility burden for every app that wants to take advantage of it.
- WestCoastJustin 13y ago
  For the screencast I was using CentOS 6.4 which is not systemd enabled.

sandGorgon 13y ago

could you double check your screencast ? My understanding is limited, but I think Systemd ver 205 changes the cgroup interaction methodology - basically systemd is a single point entry into the cgroup api. You cannot touch cgroup any other way except through systemd. FYI - this is not systemd taking arbitrary control but what the upstream kernel recommended. My understanding is that Fedora 20 (which uses systemd 208 ) will be impacted by this, as will most other distros. However jessie is proposing systemd 204, so your method might still work.

nisa 13y ago
Is there a reason for this? I'm heavily invested in Ubuntu and I'm also making heavy use of the cgroups API in its current form. Does that mean that I can't use cgroups without systemd in newer kernels? Or do I miss cgroups features? I'm quite happy with the mountable filesystem at the moment. It's scriptable and reasonable flexible and still easy to use for solving my problems.
- _delirium 13y ago
  Found a discussion here of the changes & rationale here: http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/ControlGroupInterface/ http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/ControlGrou...
  - vidarh 13y ago
    That sounds awful. The idea that systemd vs. another "cgroups owner" changes the API you need to use for interacting with cgroups will effectively impose a compatibility burden for every app that wants to take advantage of it.
WestCoastJustin 13y ago
For the screencast I was using CentOS 6.4 which is not systemd enabled.