[rescue] advice on rescuing an e10k

[Andrew Gaylard]

On 10/23/06, Jonathan C. Patschke <jp at celestrion.net> wrote:
>
>
> E-series Suns (and, I would presume, Sun Fire servers) look more like a
> cluster running in lock-step with a shared clock.  Linux doesn't support
> many systems with an architecture that looks like this (large-ish AXP
> and IA64 systems excepted).


[snip]

There are other options to consider, too.  Large systems (Sun, IBM, HP,
> etc.) tend to have embedded management hardware (thermal, partitioning,
> lights-out management, hot-swap, and component failover) that are very
> frequently only working with the vendor's operating system.  If you're
> going to run large RISC hardware in such an environment that you lose
> all the management features that come with the hardware premium, you'd
> be better off running a large fast PC, since that's essentially what
> you'll get.


[snip]

Thanks for your detailed explanations, you've pretty much convinced me.

> My main reason for using Linux is that the app I need isn't ported to
> > Solaris, and when I tried to do the port myself, it wasn't simple.
> > For instance, Solaris doesn't have
> >    fnctl( fd, O_ASYNC, ...)
>
> Well, yes.  The man page on Linux says:
>
>    The use of O_ASYNC, F_GETOWN, F_SETOWN is specific to BSD and Linux.
>
> Hence, they should not be used in portable code.  select() or a blocking
> background thread would be a more portable solution.


I know, I know, but this is the world we live in... :-(  More & more code is
being written
for a certain OS on a certain CPU family.  No names mentioned.


Andrew