## Atomic Insight CPU limits enforce a hard throttle (see [[Kubernetes CPU Limits Are a CFS Quota Not an Allocation]]), and that throttling has a real latency cost. Whether the cost is worth paying depends on who else shares the node. Limits earn their keep in multi-tenant clusters, on untrusted workloads, and on managed services like ECS that require them, or when the goal is straightforward cost control. In those cases, isolation between tenants or predictable spend matters more than any single workload's latency. Limits are "probably hurting you" in single-tenant clusters you fully control, and on bursty workloads, where throttling adds latency without a real isolation benefit since there is no other tenant to protect from the burst. The mechanism is the same either way (a CFS quota that throttles regardless of contention); the decision to set a limit at all should turn on whether isolation is actually needed, not on habit. ## Cross-Domain Connections Sibling note: [[Kubernetes CPU Limits Are a CFS Quota Not an Allocation]] (the underlying mechanism). Also related to [[Just in Time Kubernetes Resource Optimization]] (resource-spec decisions under real workload constraints). ## Source - [[Kubernetes CPU requests and limits, explained through cgroups (disclosure: my company website).md]] — Reddit r/kubernetes (/u/Old-Astronomer3995, RoszigIT blog), 2026-05-26 — https://www.reddit.com/r/kubernetes/comments/1to25dv/kubernetes_cpu_requests_and_limits_explained/