[systemd-devel] [HEADSUP] cgroup changes

[Tejun Heo]

Hello, Andy.

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 04:27:17PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I guess what I'm trying to say here is that many systems will rather
> fundamentally use systemd.  Admins of those systems should still have
> access to a reasonably large subset of cgroup functionality.  If the
> single-hierarchy model is going to prevent going around systemd and if
> systemd isn't going to expose all of the useful cgroup functionality,
> then perhaps there should be a way to separate systemd's hierarchy
> from the cgroup hierarchy.

I don't think systemd will prevent you from buildling your own
hierarchy on the side.  It sure won't be properly supported and things
might break in corener cases / over time but if you're willing to take
such risks anyway...  In the long term tho, what should happen
probably is examining use cases like yours and then incorporating
sensible mechanisms to support that into the base system
infrastructure.  It might not be completely identical but I'm sure
over time we'll be able to find what are the fundamental pieces and
proper abstractions.  Right now, we're exposing way too much without
even clearly understanding what are being enabled.  It is
unsustainable.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun