> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:37 PM, erik quanstrom <quans...@quanstro.net> > wrote: > >> I can imagine a lot of problems stemming from open files could be > >> resolved by first attempting to import the process's namespace at the > >> time of checkpoint and, upon that failing, using cached copies of the > >> file made at the time of checkpoint, which could be merged later. > > > > there's no guarantee to a process running in a conventional > > environment that files won't change underfoot. why would > > condor extend a new guarantee? > > > > maybe i'm suffering from lack of vision, but i would think that > > to get to 100% one would need to think in terms of transactions > > and have a fully transactional operating system. > > > > - erik > > > > There's a much lower chance of files changing out from you in a > conventional environment. If the goal is to make the "unconventional" > environment look and act like the conventional one, it will probably > have to try to do some of these things to be useful.
* you can get the same effect by increasing the scale of your system. * the reason conventional systems work is not, in my opinion, because the collision window is small, but because one typically doesn't do conflicting edits to the same file. * saying that something "isn't likely" in an unquantifiable way is not a recipie for success in computer science, in my experience. - erik
