From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Cc: theoh@chiark.greenend.org.uk Subject: Re: [9fans] Hans Reiser paper on name spaces in operating systems In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 16 Feb 2002 14:43:46 PST." References: From: Theo Honohan Message-Id: Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 14:47:43 +0000 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 520fb818-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 Richard Uhtenwoldt wrote: > John Murdie writes: > >For those people who haven't seen this already: a paper by Hans Reiser > >(of Reiser File System fame) called ``The Naming System Venture''. It > >briefly mentions Plan 9. > > > >http://www.namesys.com/whitepaper.html > > >From that paper: > [Plan 9's] major focus is on integration. > > Their major trick for increasing integration is unifying the name > space. > > Name spaces integrated into the Plan 9 file system include the status, > control, virtual memory, and environment variables of running > processes. They have a hierarchical analog to what the relational > culture calls constructing views, that the Plan 9 culture calls > context binding. > > Huh? Can anyone define "context binding"? Maybe Reiser is just qualifying the term binding with a parenthetical "context" in order give it an object-- as the database people construct views, Plan 9 people bind (what?). I agree that's its sloppy writing. Googling for "context plan 9 " brings up a paper about naming policies in Sun's Spring system, which appears to define and use "context" in an appropriate sense. So, maybe that's where he got it from. http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/73091.html