As a another data point I'll offer IW9P2009-Bondi - involved a lot of
beer and beach/camping but we wrote a shit-load of code. And it was
fun. Not much sleep. Had to eat too but time sharing coding and
cooking went well.
brucee
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:52 PM, andrey mirtchovski
Plan 9 itself makes a great platfrom on which to construct
virtualisation.
I don't know what Inferno is but the phrase 'virtual machine' appears
somewhere in the product description. Isn't Inferno the 'it' you're
searching for?
--On Friday, April 17, 2009 6:48 AM +0200 lu...@proxima.alt.za
having the potential for running out of memory in an interrupt
handler might be a sign that a little code reorg is in order, if you
are worried about this sort of thing. (and even if you're not.)
To begin with:
grep -n '.((iallocb)|(qproduce))' /sys/src/9/^(port pc)^/*.c
I don't know what Inferno is but the phrase 'virtual machine' appears
somewhere in the product description. Isn't Inferno the 'it' you're
searching for?
No, Inferno resembles - very superficially, as you will discover if
you study the literature - a JAVA interpreter surrounded by its own
Unlike
securitization in the hedge fund world.
Actually, it is a lot safer to provide something like securitisation
(hm, make that s a z, it is no doubt a native, American word) in a
virtualised environment, you're much less likely to bring down the
entire system's economy, then.
++L
I am interested in the idea of adding some kind of resource limits
to plan9. If they existsed I would probably open it up to external
users, however different things would worry me:
CPU use
Implement the Fair share scheduler
User memory
Working swap would do me to fix this, but sadly rlimits
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:29:47AM +0100, Steve Simon wrote:
I am interested in the idea of adding some kind of resource limits
to plan9. If they existsed I would probably open it up to external
users, however different things would worry me:
CPU use
Implement the Fair share scheduler
I see. Thanks for the edification :-) I found--still find--it hard to
understand what Inferno is/does. Actually read
http://www.vitanuova.com/inferno/papers/bltj.html but it isn't very
direct about what it is that Inferno does for a user or what a user can do
with it; what distinguishes it
What if each user can have a separate IP stack, separate
(virtualized) interfaces and so on?
already possible, but you do need 1 physical ethernet
per ip stack if you want to talk to the outside world.
But you'd have to implement some sort of limits on
oversubcribing (ratio of virtual to
Erik's mod would help, but add a seccond threshold where after 15 secconds
you kill the proc failed the most fork() calls - the danger here is a spam
storm may cause listen(1) to be killed.
You could put the rate limiting in listen(8) first, you may have
noticed that inetd(8) has this feature,
Working swap would do me to fix this, but sadly rlimits would probably
be easier to implement.
There's an intrinsic belief that there cannot be anything wrong with
Plan 9's swap. Having encountered the rather tightly embedded use of
swap/segmentation/etc. in the Plan 9 kernel, but without
How difficult would it be to use rails or merb in plan9? Is it feasible?
Not Rails or merb or anything non Plan 9 but a few of us are building an
rc shell based system that works anywhere CGI and Plan 9 / plan9port is
available.
http://werc.cat-v.org/
what it is that Inferno does for a user or what a user can do
with it; what distinguishes it from other (operating?) systems. I've
decided to try it because documentation says it will readily run on Windows.
Let's start with the fact that Inferno is a small-footprint, hosted
operating
2009/4/17 maht mattmob...@proweb.co.uk:
How difficult would it be to use rails or merb in plan9? Is it feasible?
Not Rails or merb or anything non Plan 9 but a few of us are building an rc
shell based system that works anywhere CGI and Plan 9 / plan9port is
available.
2009/4/17 Bakul Shah bakul+pl...@bitblocks.com:
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 22:19:21 EDT Devon H. O'Dell devon.od...@gmail.com
wrote:
2009/4/16 Bakul Shah bakul+pl...@bitblocks.com:
Why not give each user a virtual plan9? Not like vmware/qemu
but more like FreeBSD's jail(8), done more
If you want true isolation between the users you should give
them each a VM, not a Plan 9 account.
Russ
So we chose to use a VM, now we have two problems
*http://tinyurl.com/cuul2m
or
*
Dialing remote ports
I don't become a spam relay so some restriction must be in place,
I guess this would require a minor modification to the IP stack.
does ip/hogports solve your problem?
- erik
2009/4/17 erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net:
What if each user can have a separate IP stack, separate
(virtualized) interfaces and so on?
already possible, but you do need 1 physical ethernet
per ip stack if you want to talk to the outside world.
I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to add a
Conceptually, anyway. Why is everyone always so hell-bent on hair-splitting? :P
probably the other options suggested by the careers advisor were theology and
hairdressing.
The
virtual memory management is too persuasive to be broken in any
significant way.
do you mean pervasive? if you do, i don't buy the argument.
it's easy to get lucky when doing concurrent programming with
locks, as in the plan 9 kernel. it's easy to get lucky in many cases,
and yet have
How difficult would it be to use rails or merb in plan9? Is it feasible?
Very difficult. No, not feasible. You would have to port Ruby. And
then possibly rails, too. Plan 9 isn't UNIX, or UNIX-like, or POSIX
(or POSIX-like). APE helps with some stuff, but not all the way.
And then you would
Writing the core of a blog engine in three lines of rc is hard to
beat, plus you get the benefit of being able to manipulate and manage
all your data using the tools any self respecting Unix user loves.
uriel
well, I haven't thought about it deeply yet, but what I guess could be
a problem
2009/4/17 Rudolf Sykora rudolf.syk...@gmail.com:
Writing the core of a blog engine in three lines of rc is hard to
beat, plus you get the benefit of being able to manipulate and manage
all your data using the tools any self respecting Unix user loves.
uriel
well, I haven't thought about it
I have used it also. Circa 10.5 years ago there was a race condition in
the scripts that ran it with troff which I fixed and sent back in; I think
they got into the dist.
Literate programming is a lot of fun and works well if you have the mindset
for it.
Arnold
In article
On 04/15/2009 05:22 PM, Pietro Gagliardi wrote:
On Apr 15, 2009, at 4:26 AM, Eris Discordia wrote:
Plan 9 is not intended for home or home office.
True, but that doesn't mean it can't be used in such an environment. I
type all my reports up in Plan 9.
Please set aside rare cases and let
On 04/10/2009 05:08 AM, Eris Discordia wrote:
this is the space-shuttle dichotomy. it's a false one. it's a
continuum. its ends are dangerous.
So somewhere in the middle is the golden mean? I have no objections to
that. *BSD systems very well represent a silver, if not a golden,
On Apr 14, 7:15�pm, szhil...@gmail.com (Sergey Zhilkin) wrote:
My wireless card is not listed in Plan9.ini. Does that mean there's no
way for me to connect with that card?
Hi !
What type of wireless card you have
--
? ?? ???
?? ??
With best regards
On Fri Apr 17 08:33:12 EDT 2009, urie...@gmail.com wrote:
And then you would need some hideous SQL database.
As ken said: we have persistent objects, they are called files; and
that is what werc uses.
i feel compelled to defend one of my favorite quotes
of all time from misapplication. i'm
i know of many thousands of plan 9 systems in production right
now.
Erik, you might want to know how many *million* people use Linux ;)
Won't you?
the criticisim of plan 9 that i was respnding to was that
plan 9 was not used for anything serious or capable of
being used in production.
i
The Plan9 project started in 1980, took around 9 years to be solid
enough to be usable and that too by the internal and, or lab people
[http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/9.html] only.
unless one is speaking in geologic terms, there's a significant difference
between the mid-1980s and 1980.
Wait, am I on the wrong mailing list? Since when was this Fans of BSD
and Linux Talk about why Plan 9 Sucks Donkey Shit?
(I use FreeBSD and Linux. OTOH, I'm not on freebsd-general@ and centos
mailing lists talking about how our private namespaces and 9p are so
much shinier than VFS)
My understanding is that would prevent people listening and pretending to
offer services on my behalf, but would not stop them dialing SMTP ports
on other machines and sending them spam.
-Steve
2009/4/17 Eris Discordia eris.discor...@gmail.com:
It's like I'm seeing an apparition of myself back more than a year ago. No
wonder 9fans got to dislike me so much. Do 9fans get nuisances like me in
regular intervals?
From time to time :)
We have a high conversion rate, though.
--dho
It's like I'm seeing an apparition of myself back more than a year ago. No
wonder 9fans got to dislike me so much. Do 9fans get nuisances like me in
regular intervals?
--On Friday, April 17, 2009 1:14 PM + Balwinder S Dheeman
bdhee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 04/15/2009 05:22 PM, Pietro
The Plan9 project started in 1980, took around 9 years to be solid
enough to be usable and that too by the internal and, or lab people
[http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/9.html] only.
I was using plan9 outside of bell labs in 1993 - not very aggressively
I admit but I didn't have the skils
2009/4/17 maht mattmob...@proweb.co.uk:
well, I haven't thought about it deeply yet, but what I guess could be
a problem with your approach is that many features would have to be
somehow implemented first so that it all be useable. I mean e.g. ajax
style of page content refresh, session
Very nice of you to go to lengths for describing Inferno to a non-techie.
Thank you. Just got the Fourth Edition ISO and will try it. Maybe even
learn some Limbo in long term.
--On Friday, April 17, 2009 1:55 PM +0200 lu...@proxima.alt.za wrote:
what it is that Inferno does for a user or
hello
you might want to take a look to vitanuova resources page for other inferno
flavours than the official release.
inferno-os.googlecode.com
acme-sac.googlecode.com
slds.
gabi
It lacks usual
buttons for minimizing (hiding), maximizing, controlling windows. You
can't even send a window to background and even if Inferno's wm has some
of these including title bars, but the meanings and, or behavior of the
same is quite different from other popular GUI systems.
Here
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Eris Discordia
eris.discor...@gmail.com wrote:
Very nice of you to go to lengths for describing Inferno to a non-techie.
Thank you. Just got the Fourth Edition ISO and will try it. Maybe even learn
some Limbo in long term.
Also note there's a new book out that
Actually, I have long had a feeling that there is a convergence of
VNC, Drawterm, Inferno and the many virtualising tools (VMware, Xen,
Lguest, etc.), but it's one of these intuition things that I cannot
turn into anything concrete.
This brings to mind something that's been rolling around
in
Very nice of you to go to lengths for describing Inferno to a non-techie.
Thank you. Just got the Fourth Edition ISO and will try it. Maybe even
learn some Limbo in long term.
My pleasure. I just hope no one decides to confront me on all the
inaccuracies that are likely to have crept in :-)
Oops: sent too early... Here's the rest
It would be nice if someone could point me to some step-by-step
instructions for Plan 9 dummies,
I don't think such a thing currently exists, but if you keep
notes as you go along, you could provide the welcome service
of writing one...
But there are
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:32:33AM -0500, blstu...@bellsouth.net wrote:
- First, the gap between the computational power at the
terminal and the computational power in the machine room
has shrunk to the point where it might no longer be significant.
It may be worth rethinking the separation of
In some sense, logically (but not efficiently: read the caveats in the
Plan9 papers; a processor is nothing without tightly coupled memory, so
memory is not a remote pool sharable---Mach!),
if you look closely enough, this kind of breaks down. numa
machines are pretty popular these days
Given the feedback from the list, I've come up with two alternatives.
(Well, one of them was actually Mechiel's brainchild).
Idea #1 (From Mechiel)
Instead of doing typed allocations, give every user an allocation
pool, from which all kernel allocations will take place. To extend on
this, the
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 01:29:09PM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
In some sense, logically (but not efficiently: read the caveats in the
Plan9 papers; a processor is nothing without tightly coupled memory, so
memory is not a remote pool sharable---Mach!),
if you look closely enough, this
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 08:14:12 EDT Devon H. O'Dell devon.od...@gmail.com
wrote:
2009/4/17 erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net:
What if each user can have a separate IP stack, separate
(virtualized) interfaces and so on?
already possible, but you do need 1 physical ethernet
per ip stack
The definition of a terminal has changed. In Unix, the graphical
In the broader sense of terminal, I don't disagree. I was
being somewhat clumsy in talking about terminals in
the Plan 9 sense of the processing power local to my
fingers.
A terminal is not a no-processing capabilities (a dumb
Absolutly, but part of what has changed over the past 20
years is that the rate at which this local processing power
has grown has been faster than rate at which the processing
power of the rack-mount box in the machine room has
grown (large clusters not withstanding, that is). So the
gap
There's aquarela which is a CIFS server, but I'm not sure
about client. I seem to remember it being worked on at
one point, but I'm not sure if it was ever completed.
cifs(1) (cifs client) is alive and well at contrib/install steve/cifs
I use it every day at work, its only (known) limitation
if you look closely enough, this kind of breaks down. numa
machines are pretty popular these days (opteron, intel qpi-based
processors). it's possible with a modest loss of performance to
share memory across processors and not worry about it.
Way back in the dim times when hypercubes roamed
Absolutly, but part of what has changed over the past 20
years is that the rate at which this local processing power
has grown has been faster than rate at which the processing
power of the rack-mount box in the machine room has
grown (large clusters not withstanding, that is). So the
gap
On Fri Apr 17 14:21:03 EDT 2009, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 01:29:09PM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
In some sense, logically (but not efficiently: read the caveats in the
Plan9 papers; a processor is nothing without tightly coupled memory, so
memory is not a
There's aquarela which is a CIFS server, but I'm not sure
about client. I seem to remember it being worked on at
one point, but I'm not sure if it was ever completed.
cifs(1) (cifs client) is alive and well at contrib/install steve/cifs
I happily stand corrected.
BLS
But the question in my mind for a while
has been, is it time for another step back and rethinking
the big picture?
Maybe, and maybe what we ought to look at is precisely what Plan 9
skipped, with good reason, in its infancy: distributed core
resources or the platform as a filesystem.
What
I often tell my students that every cycle used by overhead
(kernel, UI, etc) is a cycle taken away from doing the work
of applications. I'd much rather have my DNA sequencing
application finish in 25 days instead of 30 than to have
the system look pretty during those 30 days.
i didn't mean
I cannot find the reference (sorry), but I read an interview with Ken
(Thompson) a while ago.
He was asked what he would change if he where working on plan9 now,
and his reply was somthing like I would add support for cloud computing.
I admin I am not clear exactly what he meant by this.
-Steve
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Balwinder S Dheeman bdhee...@gmail.com wrote:
Please set aside rare cases and let us know who except for the students,
teachers and, or researchers uses Plan9 and, or Inferno in the offices,
homes and, or cafes and for what?
The Plan9 project started in 1980,
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 01:31:12PM -0500, blstu...@bellsouth.net wrote:
Absolutly, but part of what has changed over the past 20
years is that the rate at which this local processing power
has grown has been faster than rate at which the processing
power of the rack-mount box in the machine
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 08:16:40PM +0100, Steve Simon wrote:
I cannot find the reference (sorry), but I read an interview with Ken
(Thompson) a while ago.
He was asked what he would change if he where working on plan9 now,
and his reply was somthing like I would add support for cloud
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:51 PM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
without some constraints on the data, you can't show that your design
works. without some idea of what the data could be, how do you pick
appropriate algorithms?
The point of the model is to enforce constraints. It
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:43 PM, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 08:16:40PM +0100, Steve Simon wrote:
I cannot find the reference (sorry), but I read an interview with Ken
(Thompson) a while ago.
He was asked what he would change if he where working on plan9 now,
and his
even today on an average computer one has this articulation: a CPU (with
a FPU perhaps) ; tightly or loosely connected storage (?ATA or SAN) ;
graphical capacities (terminal) : GPU.
It happens so that a reversal of specialization has really taken place, as
Brian Stuart suggests. These
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Eris Discordia
eris.discor...@gmail.com wrote:
even today on an average computer one has this articulation: a CPU (with
a FPU perhaps) ; tightly or loosely connected storage (?ATA or SAN) ;
graphical capacities (terminal) : GPU.
It happens so that a reversal
Robert Raschke wrote:
Also note there's a new book out that includes Inferno as a major
example, essentially explaining OS principles in general, in Inferno,
and in Linux:
Principles of Operating Systems: Design and Applications
by Brian Stuart
(
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:43 PM, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 08:16:40PM +0100, Steve Simon wrote:
I cannot find the reference (sorry), but I read an interview with Ken
(Thompson) a while ago.
My interpretation of cloud computing is precisely the split done by
plan9
Steve Simon wrote:
I cannot find the reference (sorry), but I read an interview with Ken
(Thompson) a while ago.
He was asked what he would change if he where working on plan9 now,
and his reply was somthing like I would add support for cloud computing.
Perhaps you were thinking of his Ask a
Speaking of NUMA and such though, is there even any support for it in the
kernel?
I know we have a 10gb Ethernet driver, but what about cluster interconnects
such as InfiniBand, Quadrics, or Myrinet? Are such things even desired in Plan
9?
I'm glad see process migration has been mentioned
I often tell my students that every cycle used by overhead
(kernel, UI, etc) is a cycle taken away from doing the work
of applications. I'd much rather have my DNA sequencing
application finish in 25 days instead of 30 than to have
the system look pretty during those 30 days.
i didn't
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Eric Van Hensbergen eri...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:43 PM, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 08:16:40PM +0100, Steve Simon wrote:
I cannot find the reference (sorry), but I read an interview with Ken
(Thompson) a while ago.
What struck me when first looking at Xen, long after I had decided
that there was real merit in VMware, was that it allowed migration as
well as checkpoint/restarting of guest OS images with the smallest
...
The way I see it, we would progress from conventional utilities strung
together
Absolutly, but part of what has changed over the past 20
years is that the rate at which this local processing power
has grown has been faster than rate at which the processing
power of the rack-mount box in the machine room has
grown (large clusters not withstanding, that is). So the
gap
I'd like to add to Brian Stuart's comments the point that previous
specialization of various boxes is mostly disappearing. At some point in
near future all boxes may contain identical or very similar powerful
hardware--even probably all integrated into one black box. So cheap that
The
Principles of Operating Systems: Design and Applications
by Brian Stuart
( http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1418837695 )
I've only just started reading it, so can't really comment on how good
it is yet. Looks promising so far though.
I recently bought this book and have read most
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 04:25:40PM -0500, blstu...@bellsouth.net wrote:
Again, that's not to say that there aren't other valid motivators
for some centralized functionality. It's just that in my opinion,
we're at the point were if it's raw cycles we need, we'll have
to be looking at a large
Well, in the octopus you have a fixed part, the pc, but all other
machines come and go. The feeling is very much that your stuff is in
the cloud.
I mean, not everything has to be dynamic.
El 17/04/2009, a las 22:17, eri...@gmail.com escribió:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:43 PM,
if you want to look at checkpointing, it's worth going back to look at
Condor, because they made it really work. There are a few interesting
issues that you need to get right. You can't make it 50% of the way
there; that's not useful. You have to hit all the bits -- open /tmp
files, sockets, all
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 6:15 PM, ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
if you want to look at checkpointing, it's worth going back to look at
Condor, because they made it really work. There are a few interesting
issues that you need to get right. You can't make it 50% of the way
there; that's
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:35 PM, J.R. Mauro jrm8...@gmail.com wrote:
Amen. Linux is currently having a seriously hard time getting C/R
working properly, just because of the issues you mention. The second
you mix in non-local resources, things get pear-shaped.
it's not just non-local. It's
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 04:25:40PM -0500, blstu...@bellsouth.net wrote:
Again, that's not to say that there aren't other valid motivators
for some centralized functionality. It's just that in my opinion,
we're at the point were if it's raw cycles we need, we'll have
to be looking at a large
On 4/17/09, Balwinder S Dheeman bdhee...@gmail.com wrote:
Please set aside rare cases and let us know who except for the students,
teachers and, or researchers uses Plan9 and, or Inferno in the offices,
homes and, or cafes and for what?
At the risk (or maybe honour :-) of being branded as a
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 7:01 PM, ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:35 PM, J.R. Mauro jrm8...@gmail.com wrote:
Amen. Linux is currently having a seriously hard time getting C/R
working properly, just because of the issues you mention. The second
you mix in
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 7:06 PM, J.R. Mauro jrm8...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, the problem's bigger than I thought (not surprising since I
didn't think much about it). I'm having a hard time figuring out how
Condor handles these issues. All I can see from the documentation is
that it gives you
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 10:39 PM, ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 7:06 PM, J.R. Mauro jrm8...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, the problem's bigger than I thought (not surprising since I
didn't think much about it). I'm having a hard time figuring out how
Condor handles
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
Vidi also seems to be an attempt to make Venti work in such a dynamic
environment. IMHO, the assumption that computers are always connected
to the network was a fundamental mistake in Plan 9
on the other hand, without this assumption, we would not have 9p.
it was a real innovation to dispense
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
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:56 PM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
Vidi also seems to be an attempt to make Venti work in such a dynamic
environment. IMHO, the assumption that computers are always connected
to the network was a fundamental mistake in Plan 9
on the other hand,
But I'll say that if anyone tries to solve these problems today, they
should not fall into the same trap, [...]
yes. forward thinking was just the thing that made multics
what it is today.
it is equally a trap to try to prognosticate too far in advance.
one increases the likelyhood of
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
Speaking of NUMA and such though, is there even any support for it in the
kernel?
I know we have a 10gb Ethernet driver, but what about cluster interconnects
such as InfiniBand, Quadrics, or Myrinet? Are such things even desired in
Plan 9?
there is no explicit numa support in the pc
I guess I'm a little slow; it's taken me a little while to get
my head around this and understand it. Let me see if I've
got the right picture. When I login I basically look up a
previously saved session in much the same way that LISP
systems would save a whole environment. Then when I
Every time I have to use something like
Linux or MS, I feel overwhelmed by the sheer complexity of it all.
Possibly OT, my main beef with Linux and Windows is that they keep
wanting to update themselves and the effort to manage these updates
is enormous (less so with Ubuntu, but still great).
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 12:16 AM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
But I'll say that if anyone tries to solve these problems today, they
should not fall into the same trap, [...]
yes. forward thinking was just the thing that made multics
what it is today.
it is equally a trap
95 matches
Mail list logo
