From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: From: Francisco J Ballesteros To: "9fans@9fans.net" <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 5H11) Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 00:08:57 +0200 Subject: Re: [9fans] Plan9 - the next 20 years Topicbox-Message-UUID: e4ac9db2-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Well, in the octopus you have a fixed part, the pc, but all other =20 machines come and go. The feeling is very much that your stuff is in =20 the cloud. I mean, not everything has to be dynamic. El 17/04/2009, a las 22:17, ericvh@gmail.com escribi=C3=B3: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:43 PM, 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 =20= >>> Ken >>> (Thompson) a while ago. >>> >> >> My interpretation of cloud computing is precisely the split done by >> plan9 with terminal/CPU/FileServer: a UI runing on a this Terminal, =20= >> with >> actual computing done somewhere about data stored somewhere. >> > > That misses the dynamic nature which clouds could enable -- something > we lack as well with our hardcoded /lib/ndb files -- there is no > provisions for cluster resources coming and going (or failing) and no > control facilities given for provisioning (or deprovisioning) those > resources in a dynamic fashion. Lucho's kvmfs (and to a certain > extent xcpu) seem like steps in the right direction -- but IMHO more > fundamental changes need to occur in the way we think about things. I > believe the file system interfaces While not focused on "cloud > computing" in particular, the work we are doing under HARE aims to > explore these directions further (both in the context of Plan > 9/Inferno as well as broader themes involving other platforms). > > For hints/ideas/whatnot you can check the current pubs (more coming > soon): http://www.research.ibm.com/hare > > -eric > > [/mail/box/nemo/msgs/200904/38399]