On Sat, Jun 02, 2001 at 10:10:31AM -0700, A.J. Rossini wrote: > >>>>> "v" == viral <viral@debian.org> writes: > > 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. Is there any solution to this ? Nodes can always go down.. I could cross-post to the mosix mailing list, but I'm not on it as of now, and it won't allow me to post.. > v> 1.0.3 debs are already in unstable. :) > > Thanks for the pointers for building the kernel in a previous email! I'm glad if it helped ! > 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 And I was wondering, why my machine with 128MB RAM was using up 50 MB swap consistently ! Is this going away anytime soon ? patches in the -ac series kernels ? > 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... Maybe we can have mosix, and mosix0.98 then ? I'll try to put this in sometime next week. viral -- And if your head explodes with dark forebodings too, I'll see you on the dark side of the moon.
Attachment:
pgppRPum42Z9V.pgp
Description: PGP signature