2016-01-21 17:38 GMT+01:00 NGie Cooper <yaneurab...@gmail.com>: > > > On Jan 21, 2016, at 08:34, Jan Bramkamp <cr...@rlwinm.de> wrote: > > > >> On 21/01/16 17:19, Mathieu Prevot wrote: > >> Dear all, > >> > >> I would like to connect several connected object (with homogeneous or > >> heterogenous hardare: intel edison, samsung artik, apple AX, intel > core, > >> etc) so the calculation needs, the storage/memory, the connection, etc > are > >> decoupled; hence we can reach an ecosystem with several clouds. > >> > >> How do you recommend to reach that ? from the kernel, a module, or > >> eventually a software ? > > > > Your message contains neither enough information nor a precise enough > question for anyone to provide you a helpful answer. > > > > Please describe your problem in sufficient detail and reformulate your > question. If you still think these mailing lists (current@ and hackers@) > are a good audience for your question afterward ask them again. > > It depends on your workload and hardware requirements (there isn't a > simple answer to your question because you didn't describe what you needed > with concrete requirements). > > I would talk to cem@. He's working on ioat(4) on head for us ($work). > Thanks, > -NGie >
Say all objects are connected peer to peer with wifi, some of them are connected to internet through gsm network or wifi to a box. These object are moving in space, and for some reasons, connections are dynamical and can be severely impaired or lost. They have incoming local streams of data (eg HD videos, accelerometer, GPS, other wifi and gsm signals, etc). I would like to abstract the CPU layer, storage layer, and internet connection so that in realtime results of one of my objects are saved if this object dies, so that if one of the object giving internet access to the group loose its connection, the redundancy allows the group of object not to lose internet connection. Can I consider these as different load balancing layers ? Do you recommend to implement this at the kernel layer or at an API layer ? Can I see that as a lightweight cluster ? I think the API is more flexible, especially if I have an heterogeneous (by CPU, OS) set of connected object. However, working at the kernel level allows existing programs not to be rewritten. What are your thoughts ? Do you recommend another list ? Thanks M _______________________________________________ email@example.com mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"