Article View: comp.os.mach
Article #867Re: Mach RPC Throughput...
From: Richard.Draves
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1991 17:30
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1991 17:30
18 lines
1390 bytes
1390 bytes
> Excerpts from netnews.comp.os.mach: 15-Mar-91 Re: Mach RPC Throughput... > Fletcher Kittredge@bbn.c (1629) > The answer is that this is an example of comparing an old version of > piece of software with a new version of a competing package. Given > the dates cited in your article, the Mach RPC tested would be version > 2.5 or lower. For Mach 3.0, the RPC system was completely re-written > by Richard Draves. One of the results was a real increase in speed. > You will be wanting to read the paper "A Revised IPC Interface", Richard > Draves, Proceedings of the October 1990 "Machnix" Conference, Burlington > Vt. I rewrote the kernel IPC code. I believe the Amoeba/Mach comparison was looking at network RPC throughput. We are looking at ways to improve the performance of network RPCs for Mach 3.0. Rich
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<4bsEGja00hsQI6K19M@cs.cmu.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!batcomputer!llenroc!cornell!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!o.gp.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!<UNAUTHENTICATED>+References:
<MORSE.91Mar14091659@quark.mpr.ca>, <63274@bbn.BBN.COM>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!batcomputer!llenroc!cornell!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!o.gp.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!<UNAUTHENTICATED>+ From: Richard.Draves@cs.cmu.edu Newsgroups: comp.os.mach Subject: Re: Mach RPC Throughput... Message-ID: <4bsEGja00hsQI6K19M@cs.cmu.edu> Date: 15 Mar 91 17:30:23 GMT References: <MORSE.91Mar14091659@quark.mpr.ca>, <63274@bbn.BBN.COM> Distribution: comp Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA Lines: 18 In-Reply-To: <63274@bbn.BBN.COM>