Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 14:05:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 14:04:55 -0500 Received: from nat.dmz.icopyright.com ([209.191.160.234]:48409 "EHLO enki.corp.icopyright.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 14:04:40 -0500 Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 10:33:54 -0800 (PST) From: To: Josue Emmanuel Amaro cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Advanced Linux Kernel/Enterprise Linux Kernel In-Reply-To: <3A106380.CE41BBAE@oracle.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org if you look at the kstat structure under solaris, there's a lot of info there that'd be good to be able to pull out of the linux kernel. that would slow down the kernel a little, lead to some 'bloat' that linus abhors and such, but its good to have that information for monitoring and debugging problems. it'd also be nice to have hooks built in to monitor errors in the disk subsystem and ideally warn of impending failures as much as possible -- that might be better done in userspace. and pretty much you want all error messages from different subsystems to be monitored and appropriate action taken. ideally all error messages from the kernel and device drivers should be standardized and HA software can then monitor them and take appropriate actions when it sees one that indicates failure. sun is currently in the process of documenting all the kernel error messages from what i understand. those are the kinds of things that give IT managers and sysadmins warm fuzzy feelings about solaris. On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, Josue Emmanuel Amaro wrote: > This subject came up in the Generalized Kernel Hooks Interface thread, since it > is an area of interest to me I wanted to continue that conversation. > > While I do not think it would be productive to enter a discussion whether there > is a need to fork the kernel to add features that would be beneficial to > mission/business critical applications, I am curious as to what are the features > that people consider important to have. By mission critical I mean systems that > if not functional bring a business to a halt, while by business critical I mean > systems that affect a division of a business. > > Another problem is how people define Enterprise Systems. Many base it on the > definitions that go back to S390 systems, others in the context of the 24/7 > nature of the internet. That would also be a healthy discussion to have. > > At Oracle we are primarily interested on I/O subsystem features and memory > management. (For anyone that knows anything about Oracle this should not come > as a surprise, although I am pretty sure that any database vendor/developer > would be interested on those features as well.) > > Regards, > > -- > ======================================================================= > Josue Emmanuel Amaro Josue.Amaro@oracle.com > Linux Products Manager > Intel and Linux Technologies Group > ======================================================================= > > > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/