From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 12:13:00 -0700 From: Skip Tavakkolian <9nut@9netics.com> To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] killing processes In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="upas-lrrxflxxpbahcleuvqycpfpwfc" Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8aad7a4c-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --upas-lrrxflxxpbahcleuvqycpfpwfc Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm drawterm'ed in from a client site. If I'm someplace where the link is very slow, I boot up Plan9 under VMWare and import parts of the namespace I need from the cpu. As a standalone computing service, they're still relevant. Also it's important to consider them service nodes, serving parts of the namespace (fossil) or performing specific function (auth, mail). --upas-lrrxflxxpbahcleuvqycpfpwfc Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Received: from 9netics.com ([204.145.152.35]) by 9netics.com; Thu Sep 15 07:45:54 PDT 2005 Received: from mail.cse.psu.edu ([130.203.4.6]) by 9netics.com; Thu Sep 15 07:45:52 PDT 2005 Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id 585DD6377B for <9nut@9netics.com>; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:45:30 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Delivered-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id 8165363744 for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:44:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.cse.psu.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (psuvax1 [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 07606-01-35 for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:44:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sargazos.escet.urjc.es (sargazos.escet.urjc.es [212.128.4.206]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id A2A766373C for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:44:47 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] killing processes From: "Fco. J. Ballesteros" Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 16:44:46 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at cse.psu.edu X-BeenThere: 9fans@cse.psu.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.cse.psu.edu> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: 9fans-bounces+9nut=9netics.com@cse.psu.edu Errors-To: 9fans-bounces+9nut=9netics.com@cse.psu.edu : In that sense, the 'cpu server' is outdated nomenclature. Yep. In Plan B we don't have CPU servers, actually. (We made an experiment but its result was not clear). We have "permanent terminals", though. If you own a machine, you can arrange for remote omeros to browse/exec on it. I wonder, how many 9fans are *actually* using CPU servers? [do not count a CPU server that runs your fossil as such, it's a file server, isn't it?] --upas-lrrxflxxpbahcleuvqycpfpwfc--