process checkpoint restore facility now in DragonFly BSD

[Allan Fields]

On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 10:00:29PM -0800, Peter Kieser wrote:
> freebsd-hackers != DragonFly BSD Mailing List...
> --Peter

I'd also agree further discussion on DragonFly's checkpoint facility
be taken to DragonFly lists unless/until FreeBSD decides on
implementing a similar framework.  That was the original intent of
this thread from what I can see.  It's been discussed previously
on the FreeBSD lists.

In a previous post to DragonFly lists I suggested such features
might need be developed further before potentially finding interest
in the wider BSD arena.

*BSD should implement and refine (in a BSD style) these types of
advanced features for their merits, not only because they exist
elsewhere.  So basically, for the FreeBSD project, this could imply
holding off and/or reworking the facility until it is made less
experimental, though this assumes some implicit set of flaws in
the DragonFly implementation which with time may be disproven.
Some technical caveats have been enunciated previously on list.

> Siddharth Aggarwal wrote:
> 
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I am responding to a post back in Oct 2003 when the checkpointing feature
> >was announced for DragonFly. I have been doing some research on this, and
> >have seen some projects that use Xen VMM to achieve checkpoints of guest
> >OSes.
> >
> >So I was looking for inputs from people as to what everyone feels about
> >checkpointing, whether it should be done at the physical machine level or
> >VM level. Pros and Cons of each approach, if any further development was
> >done on DragonFly for checkpoint since then and if it was stopped, why?
> >Are there serious limitations to checkpointing a physical machine?
> >
> >Sorry for such a vague posting, but I thought this would be a good
> >platform to get some feedback.

DragonFly has many experimental features.

> >Thanks,
> >Sid.

-- 
 Allan Fields, AFRSL - http://afields.ca
 2D4F 6806 D307 0889 6125  C31D F745 0D72 39B4 5541