Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750884AbVJAWvT (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Oct 2005 18:51:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750885AbVJAWvS (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Oct 2005 18:51:18 -0400 Received: from bay105-f22.bay105.hotmail.com ([65.54.224.32]:30003 "EHLO hotmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750882AbVJAWvS (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Oct 2005 18:51:18 -0400 Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [62.79.29.130] X-Originating-Email: [lokumsspand@hotmail.com] In-Reply-To: <433F0BF1.2020900@concannon.net> From: "lokum spand" To: mike@concannon.net, arjan@infradead.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: A possible idea for Linux: Save running programs to disk Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 14:51:17 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Oct 2005 22:51:17.0955 (UTC) FILETIME=[A263D930:01C5C6DA] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2758 Lines: 73 >From: Michael Concannon >To: Arjan van de Ven >CC: lokum spand , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >Subject: Re: A possible idea for Linux: Save running programs to disk >Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 18:21:37 -0400 > >Arjan van de Ven wrote: > >>On Sat, 2005-10-01 at 13:30 -0800, lokum spand wrote: >> >> >>>I allow myself to suggest the following, although not sure if I post in >>>the right group: >>> >>>Suppose Linux could save the total state of a program to disk, for >>>instance, imagine a program like mozilla with many open windows. I give >>>it a SIGNAL-SAVETODISK and the process memory image is dropped to a >>>file. I can then turn off the computer and later continue using the >>>program where I left it, by loading it back into memory. >>> >>>Would that be possible? At least a program can be given a ctrl-z and is >>> >>> >> >>there is a LOT of state though.. the moment you add networking in the >>picture the amount of state just isn't funny anymore. Your X example is >>a good one as well... >> >> >There are a few cluster/parallel computing libraries out there that are >starting to allow "process migration"... > >One would assume that "saving it to a disk" is simply a degenerate case of >migrating the process... > >Presuming they have process migration working (and it seemed close a while >ago when I last looked), saving to a file might already be supported... >I'd google "process migration" and you are likely to find a lot of >discussion on this topic... > >/mike > >>- >>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in >>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >>Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >> >> >> > In fact moving processes from one machine to another would be a brilliant feature at my work, since we run fairly large and time-consuming simulations on electronic circuits. If the kernel could natively support bouncing jobs back and forth, that would really be something. Since we simulate with proprietary software, I suppose we can't rely on the simulator being rewritten to support such special libraries. Does any other Unix variant have process bouncing already? _________________________________________________________________ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/