Re: Inter-Kernel Communications (Multi Kernel Clusters)

Inaky Perez Gonzalez (
Mon, 24 Feb 1997 12:24:48 +0100 (MET)

On Mon, 24 Feb 1997, Systemkennung Linux wrote:

>> The difference between Sprite and Linux is that linux WORKS. You could
>> also say that Solaris already does what Linux DOES. That is not the point
>> ... can you imagine using the linux kernel on a number of PC's to build a
>> mainframe style expandable cluster.
>There are some funny special cases that need to be considered. How
>does your proposal handling failing components in the cluster? Imagine
>a network failure that split your cluster in two parts, each fully
>functional but unconnected to the rest. The so called split-brain
>syndrome. Now each cluster half will continue processing and assumes
>it is authoritive? Imagine a database system being split up into
>two systems ...

What about (in the case of processes executing) leave the
continuation of execution to the uP that has all it's data in local
memory, and if more than one, the one which lastly executed it?
Or to block the process ... could be, however, that's not fail safe.

-- Linux USB is in development --

Inaky Perez Gonzalez -- PGP pubkey fingerprint - 2:341/5.31 -- 8E 34 3A 62 64 99 E2 44 - -- AD 7B 30 D9 DD FF 3E 4C -
The loneliness of the long distance runner .....