Article View: comp.arch
Article #10761Re: Comparison of Alpha, MIPS and PA-RISC-II wanted
From: gezelter
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 15:34
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 15:34
39 lines
2670 bytes
2670 bytes
In article <BzKGKB.2Bp@pix.com>, stripes@pix.com (Josh Osborne) writes: > The we need a way for user level code to tell the OS what file info is > important to cache, and what isn't. Then you can be almost as efficent > as VMS/RMS (you will have extra context switch overhead for the extra > syscalls), but you will still be able to allow any user to create new > filetypes. > -- > stripes@pix.com "Security for Unix is like > Josh_Osborne@Real_World,The Multitasking for MS-DOS" > "The dyslexic porgramer" - Kevin Lockwood > We all agree on the necessity of compromise. We just can't agree on > when it's necessary to compromise. - Larry Wall -- Josh, Important point that you bring up tangentially in your post. While VMS does provide RMS as an operating system service, there is nothing which prevents you from "folling your own" type of file structure. However, every program which wants to read from your special file structure will have to be intimately familiar with it. Programs which use RMS can process files which were created using RMS with no problems. A misnote about the HSC which appeared in this thread. The HSC does not really know anything about the content of the disk files. However, RMS will do things inside of the CPU, such as maintain index caches on a system wide basis, which are a signifigant performance improvement. One problem with rolling yourself is that, invariably, the management and monitoring tools and utilities are bare-bones. - Bob +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Robert "Bob" Gezelter E-Mail: gezelter@rlgsc.com | | Robert Gezelter Software Consultant Voice: +1 718 463 1079 | | 35-20 167th Street, Suite 215 Fax: (on Request) | | Flushing, New York 11358-1731 | | United States of America | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Dec21.103432.294@rlgsc.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!cbnewsc!cbfsb!att-out!rutgers!cmcl2!rlgsc.com!gezelterReferences:
<1992Dec19.012355.26665@ll.mit.edu> <BzIG5M.GDo@pix.com> <BzIxqo.C90@dscomsa.desy.de> <BzKGKB.2Bp@pix.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!cbnewsc!cbfsb!att-out!rutgers!cmcl2!rlgsc.com!gezelter From: gezelter@rlgsc.com Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.sys.dec,comp.sys.sgi,comp.sys.hp Subject: Re: Comparison of Alpha, MIPS and PA-RISC-II wanted Message-ID: <1992Dec21.103432.294@rlgsc.com> Date: 21 Dec 92 15:34:32 GMT References: <1992Dec19.012355.26665@ll.mit.edu> <BzIG5M.GDo@pix.com> <BzIxqo.C90@dscomsa.desy.de> <BzKGKB.2Bp@pix.com> Organization: Robert Gezelter Software Consultant, Flushing, NY Lines: 39