lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Fw: Some very thought-provoking ideas about OS architecture.
 Ben Laurie (ben@algroup.co.uk) wrote :

> shapj@us.ibm.com wrote:
> > > Persistence is a curse, not a benefit, when applied to these things.
> >
> > We haven't found that to be true, and I'ld be interested to learn why you feel
> > it is so. To the application, things appear no different than if the connection
> > to the device was severed by (e.g.) a network failure.
>
> But isn't that the problem: the application may have done things in a
> previous lifetime that caused changes at the other end of the connection
> that it is now unaware of.
>
> However, it seems to me that this is no worse than what happens if the
> application simply crashes, and in many ways better. Something I've
> forgotten about EROS: can an application force a checkpoint? If so, then
> I can't see how it can be in any way worse.


My thoughts : If consistency is important on the remote end , then the remote
end should deal with it , instead blindly accepting any input.

Transactions , maybe ?


--
David Balazic , student
E-mail : 1stein@writeme.com | living in sLOVEnija
home page: http://surf.to/stein
Computer: Amiga 1200 + Quantum LPS-340AT
--

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.045 / U:0.512 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site