I mentions this because in OSProcess-Unix there is UnixProcess class, at the class side there are several examples that launch a separate instance of Squeak/Pharo and make the two communicate with each other. In the instance of the class there are methods like forkHeadlessSqueak , forkHeadlessSqueakAndDo: etc.
So the functionality is there but since Mariano said he will be working to improve OSProcess I thought that would a very useful area to work on. Since not only will allows running on multiple cores but even to lift any memory limits. Also I think this is a nice way to make the pharo enviroment which I mean the running vm with an image and satelite files not only a collection of objects but also a object itself that can communicate with other pharo enviroment instances (Pharo running processes) . Fuel I assume enters here the equation as a data exchange format , the problem I have with fuel is that its not backward compatible which for me is a very big deal especially when we talk about threading and processes which is a pretty fundamental feature. We need something that will be stable but also code orientated that will remain backward compatible because the last thing you want is initiating multiple processes that cant understand each other because they happen to use diffirent image versions that use diffirent verrsions of Fuel or what else. On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 1:46 AM David T. Lewis <le...@mail.msen.com> wrote: > Mariano, > > I am really happy to see this and I look forword to helping you in > any way I can. > > Dimitris, > > It is really interesting that you should suggest this. I think it may > be a bit off topic for Mariano's initial goals, but Mariano is the > driving force behind Fuel, which is the serializer that I use for > RemoteTask in OSProcess/CommandShell. This attempts to do much of > what you suggest, using Fuel to return the results of processing > executed in a forked image (in the unix sense of "forked", i.e. > extremely memory efficient). > > So maybe if I can help Mariano with his project (which of course I > plan to do anyway), then he might be able to help me turn RemoteTask > into something reliable enough for general purpose use. > > Another nice connection here is that Eliot's Spur image model will > make #forkSqueak (the primitive behind RemoteTask) more efficient > in cases where the cooperating images do a lot of processing, because > memory changes are more localized in the Spur memory model. In principle > it should be possible to run very large object memories in 64-bit Spur, > while forking cooperating images that consume very little additional > real memory. > > Dave > > > On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 01:33:07PM +0000, Dimitris Chloupis wrote: > > I am very excited for such a project. > > > > I hope you manage to fix the stdout problem on macos. > > > > One thing I would like to see is an expansion of the ability of OSProcess > > to launch multiple instances of pharo and make them communicate with each > > other. Thats a way to have pharo running on multiple cores. Maybe > establish > > a framework of communication of images that will be based on the existing > > design of the fork mechanism in Pharo. > > > > Python is doing something similar with multiprocessing module which > > launches multiple processes of cpython executable and makes them > > communication with each other through a similar api to its threading > > module. This way python takes advantage of multiple cores. Python threads > > like pharo are green threads and pharo like python has a GIL like > > mechanism. > > > > Taking into account that current computers have at least 4 cores, its > not a > > bad idea to speed up pharo like this at least 400% ;) > > > > On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 3:24 PM Mariano Martinez Peck < > marianop...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > I am tremendously happy to announce you that Pharo Consortium will > sponsor > > > yet another development effort. In this particular case, it's my honor > to > > > carry on such an effort and I will be developing and improving a few > things > > > and ideas. All the contract and paperwork has already been done so it's > > > time to start working. > > > > > > Regarding the developments itself, we discussed about these topics: > > > > > > 1) Experiment with a simpler yet more limited OSProcess alternative to > > > execute OS commands. > > > 2) Improving FileSystem in order to better deal with some POSIX stuff > like > > > symbolic links, unix file permissions, etc etc. > > > > > > I have already started with 1). OSProcess is super complete and it > > > involves some packages (OSProcess / CommandShell) as well as some VM > > > plugins (OSProcessPlugin, AIOPlugin). OSProcess provides lots of > features > > > (like forking the running image) but we would like to focus only in > > > executing OS commands. In addition, OSProcess dates from quite some > years > > > ago when many of the current infrastructure features did not exist yet. > > > > > > So the idea is to think a simpler alternative to execute OS commands, > > > using new features such as threaded FFI (for example, for reading async > > > from pipes), pinned objects, etc. We want to use FFI as much as > possible > > > rather than VM plugins. > > > > > > From the image side, we are thinking about an API which would look > like a > > > builder-like API (FileSystem, XStream, etc). > > > > > > We have been discussing with David Lewis (OSProcess author) as well as > > > with Eliot Miranda, Esteban Lorenzano, Damien Pollet, Stephane > Ducasse, etc > > > in order to agree in a project that would be worth doing (otherwise we > > > would continue using existing tools). And they have all been very kind > with > > > me providing positive discussions. > > > > > > I will soon do a survey to measure the most common use cases of > OSProcess > > > and related tools. > > > > > > If you have any thought, question, feedback, or whatever, please let us > > > know. > > > > > > Finally, note that I will be doing this project together with another > > > client's project (Quuve) and my life does not have much free time these > > > days...so please be patient!!! > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > -- > > > Mariano > > > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > > > > >
