Re: Is Hurd good?
Catalin <ady982@ploiesti.astral.ro> wrote:
> So the HURD will be the most stable and the most secure operating system
> on earth but also the most slowest operating system on earth (because
> the request travels a longer way)?
I am not convinced of this. Whether a system is stable and secure or
not depends mostly on the implementation, and of course we hope to be
stable and secure one day, and that it will be easier for us to reach
this state (and keep it) than for others. But whether or not the Hurd
is slow by design is a hard question, an answer to which we can't
provide at this point yet (and I personally couldn't care less), but
here are two points you should think about:
- On current hardware, the overhead of a multiserver system may be
significant, but is there any reason why it should always be this way?
A google search for "fast context switches" and such might help you in
finding an answer to this question.
- The centralized design of systems with a monolithic kernel also has
performance drawbacks, I suggest you take a look at
<http://web.walfield.org/papers/gnu-virtual-memory-management-system-lsm-2002-07-14/>.
Cheers,
GNU/Wolfgang
--
Wolfgang Jährling <wolfgang@pro-linux.de> \\ http://stdio.cjb.net/
Debian GNU/Hurd user && Debian GNU/Linux user \\ http://www.gnu.org/
The Hurd Hacking Guide: http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hacking-guide/
["We're way ahead of you here. The Hurd has always been on the ]
[ cutting edge of not being good for anything." -- Roland McGrath ]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: