Re: [Ksummit-2010-discuss] checkpoint-restart: naked patch

[Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>]

Hello,

On 11/04/2010 02:47 AM, Nathan Lynch wrote:
>>   In this case whitelisting the allowed
>> state by requiring special APIs for all I/O (or even just standard
>> APIs as long as they are supposed by the C/R lib you're linked against)
>> is the more pragmatic, and I think faithful aproach.
> 
> I don't think users will go for it.  They'll continue to use dodgy
> out-of-tree kernel modules and/or LD_PRELOAD hacks instead of porting
> their applications to a new library.  I think a C/R library is an
> "ideal" solution, but it's one that nobody would use - especially in
> HPC, unless the library somehow provides better performance.

I hear that there are plans to integrate one of the userland
snapshotting implementations with HPC workload manager.  ISTR the
combination to be condor + dmtcp but not sure.  I think things like
that make a lot of sense.  Scientists writing programs for HPC
clusters already work in given frameworks and what those applications
do and how to recover are pretty well confined/defined.  If you
integrate snapshotting with such frameworks, it becomes pretty easy
for both the admins and users.

I'll talk about other issues in the reply to Oren's email.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun