On Thu, 2009-04-16 at 14:39 -0400, Oren Laadan wrote: > Any connection in that case is, of course, lost, and it's up to the > application to do something about it. If the application relies on > the state of the connection, it will have to give up (e.g. sshd, and > ssh, die). > And that's a good thing since that's exactly what users expect from sshd : to give up the connection when something goes wrong. I wouldn't trust a sshd with the ability to initiate connections on its own... And anyway, I still don't see the scenario where C/R a sshd is useful... Please someone (Alexey ?), provide a detailed use case where people would want to checkpoint or migrate live TCP connections... Discussion on containers@ is very interesting but really lacks of what-is-the-bigger-picture arguments... These huge patchsets are very tricky and intrusive... who wants them mainline ? what's the use of C/R ? > However, there are many application that can withstand connection > lost without crashing. They simply retry (web browser, irc client, > db clients). With time, there may be more applications that are > 'c/r-aware'. > HPC jobs are definitely good candidates. > Moreover, in some cases you could, on restart, use a wrapper to > create a new connection to somewhere (*), then ask restart(2) to > use that socket instead of the original, such that from the user > point of view things continue to work well, transparently. > Yes. > (*) that somewhere, could be the original peer, or another server, > if it has a way to somehow continue a cut connection, or a special > wrapper server that you right for that purpose. > > Oren. > -- Gregory Kurz gkurz@xxxxxxxxxx Software Engineer @ IBM/Meiosys http://www.ibm.com Tel +33 (0)534 638 479 Fax +33 (0)561 400 420 "Anarchy is about taking complete responsibility for yourself." Alan Moore. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
