From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 7 May 2001 04:14:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 7 May 2001 04:14:11 -0400 Received: from ns1.uklinux.net ([212.1.130.11]:32522 "EHLO s1.uklinux.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 7 May 2001 04:13:57 -0400 Envelope-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 05:49:08 +0900 From: Bruce Harada To: jakob@unthought.net Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dlitz@dlitz.net Subject: Re: [PATCH] CPU hot swap for 2.4.3 + s390 support Message-Id: <20010506054908.08a90927.bruce@ask.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: <20010507034208.A16593@unthought.net> In-Reply-To: <20010505063726.A32232@va.samba.org> <20010506011553.A11297@zed.dlitz.net> <3AF584A2.4050208@kalifornia.com> <20010507034208.A16593@unthought.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.4.65 (GTK+ 1.2.8; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > >How far away is the capability to "teleport" processes from one machine to > > >another over the network? Think of the uptime! > > > > > > > It is here. Look at Mosix. > > No. Not for uptime. > > The "responsibility" for process completion does not get delegated. A process > will always be bound to it's home-node (in mosix terms), no matter how far > it's "teleported". If the home-node fails, the process won't know what hit > it. > > There are good reasons why mosix let's processes depend on their home nodes. > > This is not meant as backstabbing mosix, it's a great environment for a lot > of things. > > But it's not the universal silver bullet. Take a look at http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/299905.html for something along the lines of what you want, I think (transparent process migration between nodes). As a bonus, it's also architecture-independent. Bruce