Difference between revisions of "Locus, V, Mach"

From Soma-notes
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Add notes for Yuri)
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 11: Line 11:


This paper describes some key ideas behind Mach, a seminal microkernel-based operating system.  The design of Mach informs later work in distributed operating systems.  For more background on Mach, I suggest reading [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_kernel Wikipedia's article on Mach].
This paper describes some key ideas behind Mach, a seminal microkernel-based operating system.  The design of Mach informs later work in distributed operating systems.  For more background on Mach, I suggest reading [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_kernel Wikipedia's article on Mach].
==Debate==
Debate about the pros and cons of RPC. Topic: RPCs are the right foundation for the distributed applications (on today's Internet).
==Pro==
# Easy to use
#* makes remove procedure calls look like local calls
#* local is easy
#* therefore remove is easy with RPC - good!
# (Counter to first con) Use standards, problem goes away
# Easy to debug
# Avoids complexity of protocol design
# RPC can be abstracted from the protocol design
# (Counter to fourth con) Use threads for interactivity. Manage complexity by doing things pairwise.
==Con==
# Language/implementation specific
# (Counter to third pro) Not easy to debug. example: NullPointerException thrown on server, containing line of erroneous code running on the server.
# Counter to fifth pro) But there is more overhead - slower
# Synchronous - wrong model for large, distributed applications, and also bad for users


==Questions to be discussed==
==Questions to be discussed==
Line 41: Line 21:
# To what extent does their design work in the context of the modern Internet?  Discuss wins and limitations.
# To what extent does their design work in the context of the modern Internet?  Discuss wins and limitations.
# What concepts from the paper have been adopted by today's systems?  What concepts should be adopted?  What should be ignored?
# What concepts from the paper have been adopted by today's systems?  What concepts should be adopted?  What should be ignored?
==Debate about the OSes==
Topic: Microsoft has more to learn from ______ rather than ______ or ______
because....
===LOCUS===
* + error handling
* + automatic file merging
* - sync. hotspots
** + fix by smart directory placement
* + automatic backups
* - not scalable
===V===
* + standard protocols
** - less profitable, no lock-in
* + process migration
* - slow -> context switches
* + distributed processes
===MACH===
* + microkernel -> fault tolerant
* + user space OS extensions
* + easy  shared memory (memory  obj)
* - inefficient finding of resources (ports)
** + use discovery  service
*** + more secure
**** - port search
* - slow -> context switches
* + "real" production use

Latest revision as of 14:25, 2 February 2008

Readings

David R. Cheriton, "The V Distributed System."

Bruce Walker et al., "The LOCUS Distributed Operating System."

These two papers describe V and LOCUS, two early distributed operating systems.


Michael Young et al., "The Duality of Memory and Communication in the Implementation of a Multiprocessor Operating System."

This paper describes some key ideas behind Mach, a seminal microkernel-based operating system. The design of Mach informs later work in distributed operating systems. For more background on Mach, I suggest reading Wikipedia's article on Mach.

Questions to be discussed

  1. What did the (technical) world look like when this distributed OS was designed & implemented?
  2. What are the key design features of the OS? What are the key compromises?
  3. To what extent is their system a "distributed operating system"?
  4. What is the basic argument for their design choices? What evidence do they cite in their favor?
  5. To what extent do you "believe" their design choices were right? Why?
  6. To what extent does their design work in the context of the modern Internet? Discuss wins and limitations.
  7. What concepts from the paper have been adopted by today's systems? What concepts should be adopted? What should be ignored?

Debate about the OSes

Topic: Microsoft has more to learn from ______ rather than ______ or ______ because....

LOCUS

  • + error handling
  • + automatic file merging
  • - sync. hotspots
    • + fix by smart directory placement
  • + automatic backups
  • - not scalable

V

  • + standard protocols
    • - less profitable, no lock-in
  • + process migration
  • - slow -> context switches
  • + distributed processes

MACH

  • + microkernel -> fault tolerant
  • + user space OS extensions
  • + easy shared memory (memory obj)
  • - inefficient finding of resources (ports)
    • + use discovery service
      • + more secure
        • - port search
  • - slow -> context switches
  • + "real" production use
Retrieved from "https://homeostasis.scs.carleton.ca/wiki/index.php?title=Locus,_V,_Mach&oldid=1751"