Another daemon for managing control groups [LWN.net]

Another daemon for managing control groups

Posted Dec 5, 2013 19:03 UTC (Thu) by butcher (guest, #856)
In reply to: Another daemon for managing control groups by mezcalero
Parent article: Another daemon for managing control groups

I believe it's good to have both, systemd/cgroups and cgroupd, but I'll probably be buildroot-ing images with systemd/cgroups. It seems like a more appropriate factoring of functionality.

Thanks all involved for the ability to choose.

to post comments

Another daemon for managing control groups

Posted Dec 5, 2013 20:18 UTC (Thu) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link] (2 responses)

> I believe it's good to have both, systemd/cgroups and cgroupd,

Why is it good to have both?

In what way is systemd's solution inadequate?

Another daemon for managing control groups

Posted Dec 5, 2013 20:55 UTC (Thu) by jake (editor, #205) [Link] (1 responses)

> In what way is systemd's solution inadequate?

I think primarily the problem that some people have with systemd's solution is that it requires running systemd as the system's init, which some do not want to do. According to Lennart in http://lwn.net/Articles/575847/ there are "lots of cases where you don't need systemd", but if you want to use cgroups you (will) need some kind of manager.

systemd's solution may well be perfectly adequate (or, in my mind, way better than 'adequate'), but it does require systemd.

jake

Another daemon for managing control groups

Posted Dec 6, 2013 18:06 UTC (Fri) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link]

> but if you want to use cgroups you (will) need some kind of manager.

Yes, but only one can be used at a time. So any solution that will provide cgroups management will have the same problem as systemd.

No really good way to fix this I expect.