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 12:21:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 5 May 2002 12:21:35 -0400 Received: from bitmover.com ([192.132.92.2]:23483 "EHLO bitmover.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 5 May 2002 12:21:35 -0400 Date: Sun, 5 May 2002 09:21:33 -0700 From: Larry McVoy To: Jeff Dike Cc: Mike Fedyk , 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: <20020505092133.L18594@work.bitmover.com> Mail-Followup-To: Larry McVoy , Jeff Dike , Mike Fedyk , 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> <200205051225.HAA01629@ccure.karaya.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 07:25:00AM -0500, Jeff Dike wrote: > mfedyk@matchmail.com said: > > How would this be better than MOSIX, or other clustering solutions? > > 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. See http://www.bitmover.com/cc-pitch/ for some more on this idea. I think the UML approach would be very cool. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm