Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Database Users Keen on Linux 2.6 Kernel (eWeek)
eWeek examines the
improvments to the 2.6 kernel that will help database users. "Tim
Kuchlein, director of information systems at Clarity Payment Solutions
Inc., a developer of prepaid electronic payment systems, said the ability
for the kernel to support extra memory will enable his company to work its
database like Google: running on all memory, all the time."
(Log in to post comments)
Database Users Keen on Linux 2.6 Kernel (eWeek) Posted May 16, 2003 23:19 UTC (Fri) by mbcook (subscriber, #5517) [Link] Where do these people keep getting the idea that the kernel will be released next month? You've got to be kidding me! Even if they DON'T fix things like the TTY layer, it's still going to be later than next month.
Database Users Keen on Linux 2.6 Kernel (eWeek) Posted May 17, 2003 0:22 UTC (Sat) by smoogen (subscriber, #97) [Link] That way the authors of the stories can write about the crisis of 2.6 not coming out and how Linux may fail... yadda yadda yadda. The usual thing is to set up a crisis, deliver the crisis, and then crow about how you were right about the crisis all along.
Database Users Keen on Linux 2.6 Kernel (eWeek) Posted May 17, 2003 17:19 UTC (Sat) by dsime (guest, #5764) [Link] I think that if you check back around the time, about a year ago, when the Halloween freeze date was announced you will find that along with the October date there was a release date "floated". Yes, if the freeze happened in October, 2.6 is expected around June.It was NOT firm, just a target.
Database Users Keen on Linux 2.6 Kernel (eWeek) Posted May 23, 2003 13:23 UTC (Fri) by HenryHartley (guest, #5630) [Link] I missed the part that said the kernel will be released next month. It says, "the Linux production 2.6 kernel, to be released likely by the fall," which could be as late as mid-December. And the word "likely" means it could be later than that. --
Database Users Keen on Linux 2.6 Kernel (eWeek) Posted May 19, 2003 7:49 UTC (Mon) by Klavs (subscriber, #10563) [Link] On page two, they look forward to 2.6 because it enables seperating of environments for two programs, so upgrading one won't mean nightmares for the other.This is already too easy to do via chroot - and if you don't want that - just use the vserver patch to make it easier (it uses chroot too). I do realize that they mean UML - but why would they want UML for the need they speak of here? it just means they need more memory between the two, because several UML virtual machines can't share memory, as possible with chroot/vserver. And besides there's a UML patch for 2.4, if they want it now - so I don't see it as "something to look forward to for 2.6".
Database Users Keen on Linux 2.6 Kernel (eWeek) Posted May 22, 2003 21:13 UTC (Thu) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] Because if one environment has kernel A and the other environment has kernel B, chroot won't help you.
Database Users Keen on Linux 2.6 Kernel (eWeek) Posted Jul 17, 2003 5:13 UTC (Thu) by retep (guest, #12986) [Link] You are correct, UML is available for 2.4 (as a patch). That version is very stable and used in production environments. UML is actually quite interesting WRT the 2.6 release. Since it's possible to host a UML instance running the 2.6 kernel on a host server running a 2.4 kernel. This is interesting because you can test your applications in the UML instance running the 2.6 kernel without putting your physical server at any risk. e.g. the UML file system file could be corrupted by the 2.6 kernel its running, but the host server wouldn't be. Because the 2.6 UML instance is running in the user space of the 2.4 kernel. - Peter
|
|
||||||||||||