From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262488AbUD2BZB (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Apr 2004 21:25:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262503AbUD2BZB (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Apr 2004 21:25:01 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.224.249]:9161 "EHLO main.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262488AbUD2BY7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Apr 2004 21:24:59 -0400 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Neal Becker Subject: Re: State of linux checkpointing? Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 21:24:55 -0400 Message-ID: References: <409012A4.9000502@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pool-68-236-247-103.hag.east.verizon.net User-Agent: KNode/0.7.7 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Tim Connors wrote: > Jeff Garzik said on Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:23:00 -0400: >> Neal D. Becker wrote: >> > I wonder if there is a checkpointing that will work with 2.6 kernels? >> > >> > I only need relatively basic checkpointing. No sockets or fancy stuff. >> >> You only need checkpointing when your application programmers are lazy >> and don't care about data integrity. :) > > Or you are running some kind of cluster where you want the > applications to be checkpointed transparently without the application > knowing the details of how or when they will be swapped out (but this > will need sockets anyway, so won't happen anytime soon). > I want checkpointing for: 1) Protect against job interruption due to system crash, operator error, power loss, whatever 2) Job mygration. Even manual job mygration would be nice.