On Tue, 2003-06-03 at 08:33, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: > On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 11:09:59PM +0300, Gilboa Davara wrote: > > > Actually you are correct (here I get myself crucified) but hear me out. > > I spent years of work on NT internal APIs (The the IBM OS2 APIs that > > share the same design) and the design itself is *very* impressive. > > Where is it documented? maybe we'll learn something.
Half of it in the MSDN. The NtXXXXXX are not. Well, search the Internet and you shall find. > > > > Even with the 2.6 NPTL (The Native Posix Thread Library, already out > > with the RedHat 9), the Windows NT/2K/XP/2K3 has better security and > > scheduling (Though performance is impressive) > > Sorry, but NPTL has little to do with scheduling[1] and less with > security. NPTL is a threading library[2], and the term is used > affectionately to also refer to Ingo Molnar's kernel threading > improvements and futexes support[3]. > > I've been reading about schedulers lately[4]. I wonder why do you > consider the Windows shceduler better? > > [1] All kernels supporting NPTL also use the O(1) scheduler. Maybe > that's what you had in mind? > [2] http://people.redhat.com/drepper/nptl-design.pdf > [3] See http://www.linux.org.uk/~ajh/ols2002_proceedings.pdf.gz, Rusty > Russell's "Fuss, Futexes and Furwocks: Fast Userlevel Locking in > Linux", page 479. > [4] Uresh Vahalia's Unix Internals: The New Frontiers. Recommended. Argh. I never said that it had anything to do with A. Scheduling or B. Security. I did say that NT still has a lead on that front. Oh. Here's something I don't get. Why can't one say a single word in favor of Windows without it being considered a flamebait? Gilboa ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
