Re: Contributing
Lars Marowsky-Bree <[email protected]> Wed, 16 Oct 2002 14:21:58 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.failsafe |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2002-10-10T12:17:22, Kashif Shaikh <[email protected]> said: > Yeah, FailSafe tried doing everything...even tried to create something > like a clustered filesystem(the cdb). No, the CDB is actually a very cool piece of code, albeit implemented in violation of the layering they intended to use orginally ;-) But still, it is a distributed configuration "registry", which avoids one of the most common errors - namely, configuring parts of the cluster differently by cut&paste errors etc. This is actually one of the pieces I want to rescue over to the new framework one day. > But personally, I would like that Linux become distributed, so that > low-level details like node memberships, synchronization primitives, > ipc-communication(i.e. distributed shared memory) are actually part of > the OS, and the end-user(programmer) will have a singular logical view > of the OS. This won't only benefit HA clusters, but HPCs or > load-balanced servers. The so-called "Single System Image" clustering you are referring to here is addressed by Compaq's SSI work on Linux, which is also Open Source. It requires fairly drastic changes to the Linux kernel and it is rather difficult to scale well (ie, distributing the load which was designed for UP/SMP style systems). Some of the issues are discussed in "In Search of clusters", a real classic. Sincerely, Lars Marowsky-Brée <[email protected]> -- Principal Squirrel Research and Development, SuSE Linux AG ``Immortality is an adequate definition of high availability for me.'' --- Gregory F. Pfister