9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Tharaneedharan Vilwanathan" <dharani@lucent.com>
To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] GCC3.0 [Was; Webbrowser]
Date: Thu,  6 Feb 2003 10:39:21 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <006e01c2cdf5$eb2187c0$4ef0b487@bl.belllabs.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0302060804520.10561-100000@carotid.ccs.lanl.gov>

Hi,

I like the current implementation of Plan 9. It is sufficiently fast,
stable, clean and simple to understand. If there is a severe performance
problem, someone always takes care of it.

I wouldnt worry about the 10% performance difference between Plan 9
implementation and FreeBSD or Linux. What matters is whether we can tolerate
the performance loss. As long as my apps like acme, sam, charon, etc run
sufficiently fast, why would I worry?

I also like the clean screen when Plan 9 (rio) starts: it is like starting
with a clean slate.

Regards
dharani

> On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 okamoto@granite.cias.osakafu-u.ac.jp wrote:
>
> > I think the speed is not the main matter of Plan 9, anyway.
>
> My memory is at some point it was. An intro by Honeyman at the '89 Usenix
> for a Plan 9 speaker ended with "... and he can't believe how slow X11
> is". Gosh, was it even called Plan 9 then? Is my memory wrong? I think it
> was starting to be called Plan 9.
>
> Did speed stop being a goal when Plan 9 got slower? Personally, I like
> speedy OSes. I do recall an Infocomm in 1996 where a speaker from Bell
> Labs (Holmdel) presented numbers showing FreeBSD running 10% faster than
> Plan 9 for some TCP measurements. I was surprised, as until that time I
> had assumed Plan 9 would be faster. So had the speaker. So had, according
> to the speaker, the folks at Murray Hill. Nobody expected FreeBSD to win
> that race.
>
> Side note: at some point (late 70s) I think I used just about every OS
> that ran on a PDP11 (including the Pascal-based one from Hansen, not the
> boy-band, but Per Brinch). For speed, V6 Unix always crushed them all,
> including the vendor OSes which were supposed to be so much superior (e.g.
> RSX). Speed was one distinguishing feature of Unix, the others being
> better design, code, capabilities, and, oh, everything else.
>
> We know Plan 9 has the better design, code, capabilities, etc. It would be
> nice at some point to be able to say that speed is a distinguishing
> feature of Plan 9. Is it fundamentally impossible?
>
> ron
>



  reply	other threads:[~2003-02-06 15:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-02-06  5:28 okamoto
2003-02-06  5:40 ` andrey mirtchovski
2003-02-06 15:15 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2003-02-06 15:39   ` Tharaneedharan Vilwanathan [this message]
2003-02-06 15:45     ` Ronald G. Minnich
2003-02-06 16:31       ` rob pike, esq.
2003-02-06 16:36         ` rob pike, esq.
2003-02-06 16:56           ` matt
2003-02-06 17:11             ` Ronald G. Minnich
2003-02-06 17:25               ` Tharaneedharan Vilwanathan
2003-02-06 17:32                 ` andrey mirtchovski
2003-02-06 17:44               ` Sam
2003-02-06 18:07                 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2003-02-06 18:14                   ` David Presotto
2003-02-06 18:17                     ` Ronald G. Minnich
2003-02-06 20:36                       ` Dean Prichard
2003-02-06 18:35                     ` andrey mirtchovski
2003-02-06 18:43                       ` David Presotto
2003-02-06 19:12                         ` David Presotto
2003-02-06 19:20                       ` Scott Schwartz
2003-02-06 17:06         ` [9fans] Re: Clean Code & Performance Jack Johnson
2003-02-06 17:23       ` [9fans] GCC3.0 [Was; Webbrowser] David Butler
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-02-07  1:46 okamoto
2003-02-06 20:13 Keith Nash
2003-02-06 21:29 ` Tharaneedharan Vilwanathan
2003-02-06 21:33   ` Russ Cox
2003-02-06 21:40     ` Jack Johnson
2003-02-07  8:44       ` Richard Miller
2003-02-07 13:51         ` matt
2003-02-07 14:03           ` Boyd Roberts
2003-02-07  0:06     ` Geoff Collyer
2003-02-07  5:32     ` Skip Tavakkolian
2003-02-06 17:50 C H Forsyth
2003-02-06 18:08 ` Ronald G. Minnich
2003-02-06  1:19 [9fans] Webbrowser Russ Cox
2003-02-06  3:00 ` [9fans] GCC3.0 [Was; Webbrowser] andrey mirtchovski
2003-02-06  4:16   ` andrey mirtchovski
2003-02-06 14:24     ` David Presotto
2003-02-06 15:30       ` andrey mirtchovski
2003-02-06 17:32         ` David Presotto
2003-02-06 18:10           ` William K. Josephson
2003-02-06 18:16             ` Ronald G. Minnich
2003-02-06 18:23               ` William K. Josephson
2003-02-06 21:09                 ` Ronald G. Minnich

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='006e01c2cdf5$eb2187c0$4ef0b487@bl.belllabs.com' \
    --to=dharani@lucent.com \
    --cc=9fans@cse.psu.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).