Re: Scaling noise

[Mike Fedyk]

On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 07:31:13PM -0700, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> > Unfortunately, this means
> > (a) the box needs a hypervisor (or equivalent in native nomenclature)
> > (b) substantial outlay of kernel hacking time (who's doing this?)
> > 
> > I'm vaguely attached to the idea of there being _something_ to assess,
> > otherwise it's difficult to ground the discussions in evidence, though
> > worse comes to worse, we can break down to plotting and scheming again.
> 
> I don't think the initial development baby-steps are *too* bad, and don't
> even have to be done on a NUMA box - a pair of PCs connected by 100baseT
> would work. Personally, I think the first step is to do task migration - 
> migrate a process without it realising from one linux instance to another. 
> Start without the more complex bits like shared filehandles, etc. Something 
> that just writes 1,2,3,4 to a file. It could even just use shared root NFS, 
> I think that works already.
> 
> Basically swap it out on one node, and in on another, though obviously
> there's more state to take across than just RAM. I was talking to Tridge
> the other day, and he said someone had hacked up something in userspace
> which kinda worked ... I'll get some details.
> 
> I view UP -> SMP -> NUMA -> SSI on NUMA -> SSI on many PCs -> beowulf cluster
> as a continuum ... the SSI problems are easier on NUMA, because you can
> wimp out on things like shmem much easier, but it's all similar.

Am I missing something, but why hasn't openmosix been brought into this
discussion?  It looks like the perfect base for something like this.  All
that it needs is some cleanup.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/