Jeff Dike <email@example.com> said:
> MOSIX (or Compaq's SSI) would certainly be a way of doing it. It happens
> that there's a particularly simple way of doing it with UML. You'd partition
> UML's 'physical' memory between the hosts, and use the fact that those pages
> are really virtual to fault them between hosts as needed. This would perform
> particularly badly, but its simplicity appeals to me.
An interesting and simple approach indeed; but spreading an instance across
multiple nodes is nowhere as simple as it seems; where do you keep OS data, IO
access, scheduling decisions, inter-node communication in the first place, how
to deal with node failure etc...
However, I believe it could potentially be implemented cleaner than currently
with the Compaq SSI stuff, because the encapsulation is better etc; but I have
been known to be wrong ;-)
It would certainly be very interesting. If you _really_ want to open this can
of worms, you should consider joining linux-cluster mailing list for this, or
the Open Clustering Framework list (because you are going to stumble into the
madness which is "interoperability and lack of standards" here).
Lars Marowsky-Brée <firstname.lastname@example.org>
-- Immortality is an adequate definition of high availability for me. --- Gregory F. Pfister
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to email@example.com 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 : Tue May 07 2002 - 22:00:27 EST