From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 5 May 2002 04:42:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 5 May 2002 04:42:47 -0400 Received: from adsl-63-194-239-202.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net ([63.194.239.202]:51439 "EHLO mmp-linux.matchmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 5 May 2002 04:42:46 -0400 Date: Sun, 5 May 2002 01:42:43 -0700 From: Mike Fedyk To: Vikram Cc: Jeff Dike , Guest section DW , Gerrit Huizenga , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, user-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: UML is now self-hosting! Message-ID: <20020505084243.GF2392@matchmail.com> Mail-Followup-To: Vikram , Jeff Dike , Guest section DW , Gerrit Huizenga , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, user-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: <20020505082505.GE2392@matchmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 01:29:43AM -0700, Vikram wrote: > > > > > How would this be better than MOSIX, or other clustering solutions? > > > > Any URLs you may have on this would be quite helpful. > > uh-huh, you miss the pt maybe? uml offers a great testing, debugging, > developing platform. the whole idea is to replace the real thing (say like > kernel devel) with UML and your qn is more like why cant we use the real > thing itself....:) If you want to test clustering (or "UML SMP over several seperate hosts" -JDike) with UML, why not just create a UML kernel with the clustering support (ie, MOSIX) in that UML kernel? Really, I'm just asking what the benifit is to use UML for clustering as oposed to MOSIX. I can think of one, testing NUMA without special hardware...