[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: mosix is in unstable.



>>>>> "v" == viral  <viral@debian.org> writes:

        (>> = Jon)
    >> looks like the packaged version is 1.0.1, so that's what I'm
    >> running. One of the machines surcummed to something last night,
    >> it's up and pingable, but ssh died and processes aren't going
    >> there any more.

    v> Let me know if you find out what happened. I have noticed heavy
    v> arp activity on my mosix cluster, when I was running 2.2.17 at
    v> times, which I couldn't explain for. Someone on this list said
    v> that he experienced the same thing if a mosix node went
    v> down. Do you see any such activity ?

I do -- or if a node is "closed" for recieving.
 
    v> 1.0.3 debs are already in unstable. :)

Thanks for the pointers for building the kernel in a previous email! 

BTW, 2.4.[45] have nasty, nasty habits of not freeing swap[1].  I've
gotten burned by this (some of the simulations I run are moderately 
big, pushing things into swap on a reasonably big machine).

[1]: recent Kernel-Traffic report

you might consider the 2.2.19 mosix patches (not sure how to include
them, something like mosix2.2.19 package (yech), or similar -- but
I've got no better suggestions).

2.2.19 + Mosix 0.98 has been semi-rock solid, from what I've been
observing...

best,
-tony

-- 
A.J. Rossini				Rsrch. Asst. Prof. of Biostatistics
U. of Washington Biostatistics		rossini@u.washington.edu	
FHCRC/SCHARP/HIV Vaccine Trials Net	rossini@scharp.org
-------- (wednesday/friday is unknown) --------
FHCRC: M-Tu : 206-667-7025 (fax=4812)|Voicemail is pretty sketchy/use Email
UW:    Th   : 206-543-1044 (fax=3286)|Change last 4 digits of phone to FAX



Reply to: