Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 16th Apr 2006 15:36 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes Right in between a car crash and Easter, I knew I had to write a Sunday Eve Column. So here I am, digesting vast quantities of chocolate eggs (and I don't even like chocolate), craving for coffee (for me about as special as breathing), with the goal of explaining to you my, well, obsession with microkernels. Why do I like them? Why do I think the microkernel paradigm is superior to the monolithic one? Read on.
Thread beginning with comment 115308
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Microkernels can be fast/performant
by Ronald Vos on Sun 16th Apr 2006 17:12 UTC
Ronald Vos
Member since:
2005-07-06

For example Exec is mentioned on wikipedia as an 'atypical microkernel', which is part microkernel, part hybrid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernel_%28computer_science%29#...

Also, from what I've read some nanokernels with limited amounts of features do fine.

Projects like Gnu HURD are, in my humble opinion, destined to fail if they persist in aiming for a 'theoretically pure' implementation anyway; I believe hybrids to feature the best of both worlds. If you use services and modules, you can get performance, customisability, hotreloadability and overseeable complexity at multiple levels all at the same time. No surprise the kernels most used in practice feature either modules or services.

If you want performance, you'd be better off using exokernels anyway. I'm surprised this hasn't escaped from academia yet.

Reply Score: 1

Pixie Member since:
2005-09-30

If you want performance, you'd be better off using exokernels anyway. I'm surprised this hasn't escaped from academia yet.
Don't let EyeAm hear you! ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1