> Why not do it the other way? "If you don't hear from me for 2 minutes,
> do a switchover". Then all you have to do is _not_ to send a packet --
> easier to do.
>
> Anything else seems overkill.
> Pavel
Because in some of the scenarios, including ours, it isn't a
simple failover to a known alternate device or configuration --
it is reconfiguring dynamically with information received on a
socket from a remote machine (while the swap device is unavailable).
Limited socket communication without allocating new memory
that may not be available is the problem definition. Avoiding the
problem in the first place (your solution) is effective if you
can do it, of course. The trick is to solve the problem when you
can't avoid it. :-)
+-DLS
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
