[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [DotGNU]Re: MOSIX as WOS
From: |
Bill Lance |
Subject: |
Re: [DotGNU]Re: MOSIX as WOS |
Date: |
Wed, 17 Oct 2001 13:54:35 -0700 (PDT) |
--- David Nicol <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> The question becomes, is the gain from MOSIX peering
> worth the
> trouble of configuring and then using a secure
> tunnel, in both CPU load
> and bandwidth use?
Indeed, what is gained? The MOSIX environment
migrates processes from one heavily loaded CPU to
another less loaded CPU. That process is of interest
only to the original home site of execution. And the
host OS system is unaware of the guest processes.
This is an interesting way to make use of unused CPU
cycles, but how does this translate into a useful p2p
environment?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com
- [DotGNU]An interesting clue, Bill Lance, 2001/10/15
- Re: [DotGNU]An interesting clue, Norbert Bollow, 2001/10/16
- Re: [DotGNU]An interesting clue, Bill Lance, 2001/10/16
- [DotGNU]MOSIX as WOS, David Nicol, 2001/10/16
- [DotGNU]Re: MOSIX as WOS, Bill Lance, 2001/10/17
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: MOSIX as WOS, David Nicol, 2001/10/17
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: MOSIX as WOS,
Bill Lance <=
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: MOSIX as WOS, David Nicol, 2001/10/17
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: MOSIX as WOS, Norbert Bollow, 2001/10/18
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: MOSIX as WOS, Bill Lance, 2001/10/18
- [DotGNU]PVM as WOS, David Nicol, 2001/10/18
- [DotGNU]Re: PVM as WOS, Norbert Bollow, 2001/10/19
- [DotGNU]X as WOS, David Nicol, 2001/10/19
- [DotGNU]Re: X as WOS, Norbert Bollow, 2001/10/20
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: X as WOS, Adam Theo, 2001/10/30
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: X as WOS, Mario D. Santana, 2001/10/30
- Re: [DotGNU]Re: X as WOS, Adam Theo, 2001/10/30