Linked by David Adams on Thu 1st Jul 2010 08:52 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source The HURD was meant to be the true kernel at the heart of the GNU operating system. The promise behind the HURD was revolutionary -- a set of daemons on top of a microkernel that was intended to surpass the performance of the monolithic kernels of traditional Unix systems and in doing so, give greater security, freedom and flexibility to the users -- but it has yet to come down to earth.
Thread beginning with comment 432269
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Key Observation
by scolabirra on Fri 2nd Jul 2010 09:38 UTC in reply to "Key Observation"
scolabirra
Member since:
2008-10-02

Is that NeXT and Apple seemed to make Mach work. Why is that? Simple. ...


It's not so simple: the apple's kernel is XNU which is an hybrid kernel and not a pure microkernel. In fact, it has Mach as core, and a BSD system as only daemon for everything else. So the limitations due to the Mach microkernel (slow IPC) don't penalize the performances too much.
However in a system like Hurd, where each OS task is handled by a separated daemon, these limitations are really an issue.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Key Observation
by Neolander on Fri 2nd Jul 2010 12:40 in reply to "RE: Key Observation"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Microkernels do not need to be slow. Look at those computer they sell today, which take 1 minute to boot while running on hardware millions of times faster than the ones which could boot in 15 seconds some years ago.

Compared to that, what are a few microseconds spent on IPC worth ?

Edited 2010-07-02 12:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Key Observation
by Panajev on Fri 2nd Jul 2010 13:00 in reply to "RE[2]: Key Observation"
Panajev Member since:
2008-01-09

Every ms counts if you do some process 1000x or more... as you can see in some tasks you might do yourself during the day ;) .

Reply Parent Score: 1