Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Hot-Replace Server For Wayland Is Proposed

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A Hot-Replace Server For Wayland Is Proposed

    Phoronix: A Hot-Replace Server For Wayland Is Proposed

    While proposals for this year's Google Summer of Code is quickly coming to an end, there's been a last minute proposal for the Wayland Display Server. This proposal is to work on a hot-replace server...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTI4OQ

  • #2
    I don't think Wayland is part of the projects approved for GSoC 2011. Is this proposal going to be part of the X.org bunch?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by loonyphoenix View Post
      I don't think Wayland is part of the projects approved for GSoC 2011. Is this proposal going to be part of the X.org bunch?
      According to this, you are completely right.

      Comment


      • #4
        this sound like a great idea.

        Comment


        • #5
          what is the purpose and the advantages of being able to hot-replace the server????

          can someone explain?

          Comment


          • #6
            It allows the server to be replaced with a different one. In theory, Wayland servers include the window manager and compositor behavior built in (though nothing about the protocol stops you from building a server that uses a separate process for those) and you may want to swap those out. Same as today you can swap out window managers or compositors on X11 today.

            Also, it allows apps to recover from a server crash. Which seems to happen often enough already on X11. You want the system to be resilient. Nothing sucks harder than having a single buggy process bring down your entire desktop and all your applications and data working set.

            Comment


            • #7
              Can it solve issue with nvidia optimus?

              Comment


              • #8
                I wonder if this could be used to move an application from one server to another, similar to that ancient tool xmove. Though I gather Wayland won't have the so-called "network transparency" that makes X11 Forwarding work. Has that situation changed? I think it's very important.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by elanthis View Post
                  It allows the server to be replaced with a different one. In theory, Wayland servers include the window manager and compositor behavior built in (though nothing about the protocol stops you from building a server that uses a separate process for those) and you may want to swap those out. Same as today you can swap out window managers or compositors on X11 today.

                  Also, it allows apps to recover from a server crash. Which seems to happen often enough already on X11. You want the system to be resilient. Nothing sucks harder than having a single buggy process bring down your entire desktop and all your applications and data working set.
                  thanks

                  @Chewi
                  Wayland afaik WILL have the same functionality with X. It will just not be in the protocol.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Thanks for that info, 89c51.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Potential...

                      *IF* this happened and Wayland protocol could go over TCP, this could be very good for remote desktop. " it would need to support proper disconnecting of Wayland clients," I would *love* for a screen-like capability in X (currently using NX to get that in X) Where each window is presented indiviudally down to the client and the client can then do the compositing. VNC is too 'dumb' (just move pixels back and fourth) and X has no inherent detach capability and works poorly with high latency. This sort of enhancement would really sell me on Wayland as a worth-ditching X solution.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        i think there was a thread in the mailing list about possible solutions to the networking problem a few months back.

                        however the devs are probably working on other stuff right now

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by elanthis View Post
                          Also, it allows apps to recover from a server crash. Which seems to happen often enough already on X11. You want the system to be resilient. Nothing sucks harder than having a single buggy process bring down your entire desktop and all your applications and data working set.
                          This, assuming the proxy isn't buggy and won't crash as much as the "server" (I'd hope the compositor wouldn't crash, since it shouldn't be doing anything that would incite a crash).

                          The idea is good though; will keep those people who often change window managers happy...and those who live on the bleeding edge, too, I guess. ;-)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by elanthis View Post
                            It allows the server to be replaced with a different one. In theory, Wayland servers include the window manager and compositor behavior built in (though nothing about the protocol stops you from building a server that uses a separate process for those) and you may want to swap those out. Same as today you can swap out window managers or compositors on X11 today.

                            Also, it allows apps to recover from a server crash. Which seems to happen often enough already on X11. You want the system to be resilient. Nothing sucks harder than having a single buggy process bring down your entire desktop and all your applications and data working set.
                            This means you can update Wayland to a new version and not have to restart it by closing and opening right?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by pvtcupcakes View Post
                              This means you can update Wayland to a new version and not have to restart it by closing and opening right?
                              Well, sort of. The way I understand it, the compositor is (or was) supposed to be part of the window manager (or any program that implemented window-manager-like functionality. This "Server", or "proxy" (depending on how it's implemented, it could be called either) that is being proposed is supposed keep some of the information that the compositor would lose in the event of a crash. If it works, you'll be able to change compositors much like you are able to do "openbox --replace". You shouldn't need to restart the compositor when it's upgraded (you'll just run the older compositor until you do), unless it needs to access some libraries that have changed and there's an internal or external ABI/API break.

                              /end

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X