Slashdot Mirror


One-Machine Linux Cluster

An AC wrote: Forget Beowulf ? clusters, Jacques Gelinas has made available a kernel patch to enable many virtual servers running on the same machine, even the same kernel. Read his original message posted to the Linux kernel list." Imagine what this will mean for hosting companies...

6 of 260 comments (clear)

  1. Very Useful by Gregg+Alan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Slashdotted before I could read the whole thing. :( But, as a sysadmin for a smallish web devolopment/hosting company I could REALLY use some separation between certain clients. Sure, this isn't ready for production systems but one day it may be.

    The patcher is right...modern CPUs (for my industry) have PLENTY of power. What I hate is having to run some third party app for a client (even in a Linux environment) that *might* affect the whole machine. This patch holds the promise that I won't have as much to worry about.

    Yes, this is a good thing.

    --
    Here before all but 8486 of you.
  2. Isn't this sorta the opposite... by josquint · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... of clustering. Its... slicing your box up...

  3. mosix by morcheeba · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder how this would work with mosix... it could be a dream system!

    You could use mosix to combine the compute resources of several boxes to look like one box. And then, you could use this divy up the space so that people don't step on each other. When anyone (working in thier own space) kicks off a large compile, the load would transparently be distributed among all the boxen.

    Of course, I have zippy experience with any of this, but it sounds possible.

  4. Re:User Mode Linux? by Florian+Weimer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At the moment, User Mode Linux does separate the processes in a VM from the host system. That's because the kernel image itself is writable for the processes running in a UML virtual machine, which means that processes can break out of the virtual machine pretty easily and gain access to the account running UML on the host system. In addition, even if this is corrected (perhaps it has been during the last few weeks, I haven't checked), the kernel memory would still be read-only for the processes run by it, so different processes in the virtual machine could snoop each other. This means that User Mode Linux is great for testing stuff, but it only moderately increases security.

    The patches for compartmentalization which mimic FreeBSD's jail(8) feature are completely different. If they are done properly (and checking this will require some time), they can provide complete separation of the processes running in different compartments. Performance is probably a bit better, too, because only one kernel is running, and not a stack of two.

    Again, if you need compartmentalization now, and you have security concerns, you should either use FreeBSD, or GNU/Linux on S/390. This new kernel feature will need a bit of time to settle down and work correctly (from a security point of view).

  5. Re:Beaowulf not the target audience by PD · · Score: 5, Funny

    IBM is already running 15000+ linux servers (seperate kernel and all) on a single iron ..


    They're running that on an iron? My god, technology is moving so fast now. They've skipped right over the toaster.

  6. *This* is why open source works by mubes · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Much respect to this guy. He's taken something thats big, hairy and complex and looked at it from a different direction. Because he's got access to the source he's been able to do something novel with it in what appears to be an efficient and simple way...you couldn't do that with any of the closed source OSes out there today!

    The beauty of this is that there's *one* kernel running so, apart from any overhead of selecting the environment, you pretty much get the same performance as running native. This has got to have 1001 applications.

    One of the things I'd personally like to see is some kind of overlaid filesystem so each image by default gets /bin /lib etc. from a generic set but users can modify them if they need to - this would allow a sysadmin to keep the default system current while not preventing 'owners' of an individual image from being able to change things if they need to....I vaguely remember something like this for CDs - anyone got the details? Time for a bit of experimentation ;-)