[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    Subject"partial" container checkpoint
    On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 10:29 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
    > I think the perceived need for it comes, as above, from the pure
    > checkpoint-a-whole-container-only view. So long as you will
    > checkpoint/restore a whole container, then you'll end up doing
    > something requiring privilege anyway. But that is not all of
    > the use cases.

    Yeah, there are certainly a lot of shades of gray here. I've been
    talking to some HPC guys in the last couple of days. They certainly
    have a need for checkpoint/restart, but much less of a need for doing
    entire containers.

    It also occurs to me that we have the potential to pull some
    long-out-of-tree users back in. VMADump users, for instance:

    If we could do *just* a selective checkpoint of a single process's VMAs,
    the bproc users could probably use sys_checkpoint() in some way. That's
    *way* less than an entire container, but it would be really useful to
    some people.

    -- Dave

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-04-14 18:39    [W:0.020 / U:8.060 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site