From: Fco.J.Ballesteros <nemo@plan9.escet.urjc.es>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Essay: Is network transparency something bad?
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 09:24:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <30986a53285178a90900a7046bb079ea@plan9.escet.urjc.es> (raw)
> For example, he states "1. Availability, 2. Latency and 3.
> Reliability" as the major differences between the local and remote
> resources. That difference would apply to any two different medium
> like a pair of telephones and a pair of cans connected by a string.
Well, I've never seen a local procedure call suffer from any of them.
However, an rpc might do so.
I think we probably agree that one nice thing of Plan 9 is that you
(1) may control what comes from where (no transparency here), but then you
(2) may just use the resources always in the same way (here you got your
transp.).
I wouldn't like to loose 1 or 2; I just need both to keep things working
and simple.
next reply other threads:[~2002-10-25 7:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-25 7:24 Fco.J.Ballesteros [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-10-24 21:49 Skip Tavakkolian
2002-10-25 2:04 ` paurea
2002-10-24 17:54 rog
2002-10-24 18:40 ` Scott Schwartz
2002-10-24 19:05 ` Ronald G Minnich
2002-10-24 19:25 ` Dan Cross
2002-10-24 19:32 ` Scott Schwartz
2002-10-25 13:10 ` Boyd Roberts
2002-10-24 22:09 ` Steve Kilbane
2002-10-24 17:08 Russ Cox
2002-10-24 17:16 ` John Saylor
2002-10-25 11:44 ` Boyd Roberts
2002-10-25 12:08 ` Ram'on Garc'ia Fern'andez
2002-10-25 13:31 ` Boyd Roberts
2002-10-24 16:43 Skip Tavakkolian
2002-10-24 15:51 Ramon Garcia
2002-10-24 17:36 ` Dan Cross
2002-10-25 0:06 ` paurea
2002-10-25 14:40 ` Dan Cross
2002-10-24 15:09 Skip Tavakkolian
2002-10-24 18:58 ` Dan Cross
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=30986a53285178a90900a7046bb079ea@plan9.escet.urjc.es \
--to=nemo@plan9.escet.urjc.es \
--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).