How often would a company that demands 24x7 uptime /want/ to upgrade their
kernel? It seems to me that when the choice been decided to take that
kind of a step in a production environment, that someone has done lots of
tests with the new target kernel, so that even if they don't have the
extra hardware to bring up another server in parallel, the most downtime
that would be suffered would be the time it takes to do two boots (boot
the new kernel, find out it doesn't work, reboot the old one.)
Not to discourage anyone, but is this really necessary, or is it something
to be worked on just to say that it can be done?
Just a random comment from someone who knows very little.
Regards,
Mike
On Thu Jul 12 12:23:31 2001 Albert D. Cahalan said...
> Rik van Riel writes:
>
> > I won't have time to put in a project as huge and difficult
> > as upgrading the kernel "live", but I'll be around to try
> > and teach people about how the kernel works.
>
> I think I see a business opportunity here.
>
> Live upgrades require data structure conversion and other horrors.
> You can't just write the code and expect it to maintain itself.
> You'd need to rewrite half of it every time, for every patch level.
>
> The 24x7 places might be willing to pay somebody to do this.
> It's consulting work really. The customer says "I want to go
> from 2.4.8 to 2.4.12", you say "OK, $320405 please.", and you
> make a custom upgrade procedure for them.
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 15 2001 - 21:00:17 EST