[Vm-dev] [Pharo-project] Plan/discussion/communication around new
Andreas.Raab at gmx.de
Fri Jun 15 15:26:45 UTC 2012
> >Remember, what i have been told when i implemented a language-side
> > scheduling, removing the
> > need of VM to even know that is Semaphore?
> > I been told *it is slow*. And this was the *only* argument against it,
> > why it is found unacceptable.
> > I think you might be misremembering. IIRC, the real argument was the
> risk (albeit expressed as performance concerns) of replacing VM-level
> scheduling by image-level scheduling without further ado. I don't recall
> that anyone had an objection to image-level scheduling as an option in
> addition to VM-level scheduling. In which case one can experiment with
> the implications and learn from the change in the environment without
> necessarily committing the production systems to an unproven feature.
> But that's what i did, i made VM which remain compatible to existing
> scheduling policy,
> but adds a way to have a language-side scheduling, you simply
> switching the scheduler object,
> and voila, you got an image-side scheduling.
> So, if you not sure about unproven part, you can keep running using a
> "proven" one..
Right. I misremembered the implementation. But when I was re-reading the
discussion just now, there was not a single voice being raised against your
proposal. Not one. There was only applause and encouragement and
excitement. People did comment on performance but in no way rejecting the
implementation for it. Here is what searched for:
Is it perhaps possible that you simply dropped forgot to push it all the
way through to VMMaker? My search does not find any results on VM-dev which
to me indicates that the code was probably never "on the table" for
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Vm-dev