Hi. On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 16:55 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Fri 2007-04-27 08:41:56, Pekka Enberg wrote: > > On 4/27/07, Pavel Machek <[email protected]> wrote: > > >Now, it would be _very_ nice to be able to snapshot system and > > >continue running, but I just don't see how to do it without extensive > > >filesystem support. > > > > So what kind of support do we need from the filesystem? > > "forcedremount ro, not telling anyone, not killing processes" would do > the trick. FS snapshots might do. It sounds to me more like Pekka is thinking of checkpointing support. If that's the case, then remounting filesystems isn't going to be an option. You want to freeze them for just long enough so that you can determine what needs saving in the checkpoint. You certainly don't want to make rw file handles ro and so on. Nigel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- References:
- Back to the future.
- From: Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]>
- Re: Back to the future.
- From: "Pekka Enberg" <[email protected]>
- Re: Back to the future.
- From: Nigel Cunningham <[email protected]>
- Re: Back to the future.
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: Back to the future.
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- Re: Back to the future.
- From: "Pekka Enberg" <[email protected]>
- Re: Back to the future.
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- Back to the future.
- Prev by Date: Re: [patch 12/13] signal/timer/event fds v10 - eventfd wire up x86_64 arch ...
- Next by Date: BAD PATCH: IDE: remove rwsem use from ide-proc core
- Previous by thread: Re: Back to the future.
- Next by thread: Re: Back to the future.
- Index(es):
 |