https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214845 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214845#c13 James Fehlig <jfehlig@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME Status|NEW |RESOLVED Flags|needinfo?(chrisvte@gmail.co | |m) | --- Comment #13 from James Fehlig <jfehlig@suse.com> --- (In reply to Michal Koutný from comment #12)
(In reply to James Fehlig from comment #11)
I can only say there are penalties as per the comment in /usr/lib/systemd/system.conf.d/__20-defaults-SUSE.conf. Perhaps Michal can shed some light.
Universal answer in [1]. As for memory controller -- it's workload and nr_cpus (contention/parallelism) dependent (as always). A targeted microbenchmarks saw below 10% drop. I believe in real workloads it will be diluted and negligible unless you want to squeeze every last cycle and byte (memcgs also need memory for themselves) of the machine. Partitioning memory into (accounting) cgroups affects reclaim, that may affect interference between jobs on the machine (which would be again workload dependent but it generally makes sense using memcgs between containers).
[1] https://documentation.suse.com/sles/15-SP5/html/SLES-all/cha-tuning-cgroups. html#sec-tuning-cgroups-accounting
Thanks Michal for your always insightful comments :-). I'm going to close this bug now as worksforme since there were no actual fixes, only configuration changes. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.