From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <200210242209.XAA01458@localhost.localdomain> To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Cc: steve@localhost.localdomain Subject: Re: [9fans] Essay: Is network transparency something bad? In-Reply-To: Message from rog@vitanuova.com of "Thu, 24 Oct 2002 18:54:50 BST." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Steve Kilbane Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 23:09:26 +0100 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 0c90b886-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 rog wrote: > i think plan 9's approach is better than the more usual "network > transparency" where a function or method invocation is turned into an > RPC behind your back. Or to put it another way: sweeping the problems under someone else's carpet. In this case, the user's. > it's interesting to see what *does* lock up when a file access takes > an unexpectedly long time Indeed. It's fun when the expected value for "a long time" changes by many orders of magnitude. I once dealt with an OO database, where the database transactions could last for many months between initiation and commit rather than mere seconds. That changed a few working methods.