top | item 26557648

(no title)

cycloptic | 5 years ago

>there's no other option for accessing resources

That seems like it would create difficulties in porting software there. Please correct me if I'm wrong but the original plan9 appears to also have no support for shared memory or for poll/select.

>Backfilling IO on page fault is really all mmap does, conceptually.

For read-only resources yes, for handling writes to the mmapped region, that seems quite broken.

discuss

ori_b|5 years ago

Plan 9 is not a posix system. That means it doesn't have to deal with legacy posix behavior. If you want unix, it's easy to get it.

> For read-only resources yes, for handling writes to the mmapped region, that seems quite broken.

No more broken than mmap of nfs. Consistency is hard.

cycloptic|5 years ago

>No more broken than mmap of nfs.

Right, I get that's what you meant, it doesn't seem to really change much versus NFS, or DCOM, or whatever. So it's unclear what benefit is being provided by 9p here.

Also upon further research I am not sure what you mean by this is the only option, plan9 seems to suggest use of channels for other types of IPC interfaces, which seem to not be the same as 9p and are not necessarily network serializable. (Or are they?)