On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 14:04 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > Gerrit Huizenga <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Kexec/kdump has a chance of working reliably. > > IOW: Kexec/kdump has a chance of not working reliably. > > Worried. it's about rates... you can hose your system so bad that nothing can fix it. the "distro" stuff probably succeeds 10% of the time in non-artificial cases, the kexec one has the potential at least to go 90% (so yes I admit that I pull these numbers out of my backside but I'm with Gerrit on this one). The stuff the distros ship is also not so nice in that you can't dump to LVM or SAN or ... etc; kexec gets all that right. It's also far more an all-or-nothing thing; if you make the transition you know you're going to get a good dump; most of the other dumps die halfway in the process at some point.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- References:
- Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status
- From: Gerrit Huizenga <[email protected]>
- Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status
- Prev by Date: 2.6.12 with dual way dual core ck804 MB
- Next by Date: [patch,rfc] allow registration of multiple netpolls per interface
- Previous by thread: Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status
- Next by thread: Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status
- Index(es):
 |