Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 19:28:19 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: hasty@rah.star-gate.com (Amancio Hasty) Cc: dillon@apollo.backplane.com, hasty@rah.star-gate.com, tlambert@primenet.com, dyson@iquest.net, dick@tar.com, jplevyak@inktomi.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: lockf and kernel threads Message-ID: <199903061928.MAA09945@usr06.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <199903052022.MAA82649@rah.star-gate.com> from "Amancio Hasty" at Mar 5, 99 12:22:14 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Not unless you want to rewrite the kernel. But it's actually more the > > We shall see if the above statement is true or not . In the mean time, > with the intent to anchor the discussion in a positive direction , I ask > Terry to produce a draft paper on how to implement ASTs on FreeBSD. I will work on an async call gate paper. I have published much of what I have to say, short of an implementation, in this thread, already. I will *not* work on AST's. I believe they are a dead end, since they fail in the face of proxy distribution by requiring complete knowledge on both ends. This prevents an intermediary from forwarding a request that it can't personally satisfy. Consider the difference between "call by descriptor" and "call by argument" that distinguished John Heidemann's network VFS proxy layer from NFS. Call by argument is evil. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199903061928.MAA09945>