On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 6:40 AM, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Here's a bigger question, now that I've read the paper and briefly >> scanned the code. Do you have some thoughts on the long term ability >> of vx32 to get close to unity performance on a system (like Plan 9) >> with a high rate of context switches between file server processes >> (you allude ot this cost in the paper). It's an ideal terminal right >> now. I don't see a need to use drawterm any more. >> >> But running fossil and venti, it's got a ways to go in terms of >> performance (i.e. mk clean in /sys/src/9/pc takes ~60 seconds). > > import(1)'ed files, host files and ramfs files are similarly slow.
I don't want to turn this into a "let's pile onto vx" discussion, just more a discussion of how far we can go with the approach performance-wise. Some of the issues are well brought out in the paper, I'm just rolling the questions around in my sleep-deprived mental state. I'm currently just trying to figure out how to (re)package THX to make it easier for people to use, and which virtualization system to use ... ron
