Re: [9fans] hacking issue: memory resizing

[Tim Newsham <newsham@lava.net>]

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Ronald G Minnich wrote:
> My impression in general is that the device stuff in Plan 9 is not terribly 
> dynamic -- not surprising, given the time in which the code was  written.

This brings up something I've been wondering about lately.  Plan 9 was 
written for a particular environment (file server, cpu servers, many 
terminals).  It works well there but obviously lacks some features that a 
more "modern" environment might desire.  You hear it sometimes on this 
mailing list "I want to do so and so." "well, so and so doesn't really 
work well, remember the typical setup is a fileserver, cpu servers and 
terminals."

So the big question here is -- what would a more modern environment be, 
and what could plan9 (or a system like it) do to fit in better. Plan B 
looks like its addressing this issue in one sense (although perhaps not in 
the type of environment I would typically use computers in today).

I think this "hot swappable devices and services" thread is one instance 
of grappling with this larger issue.  What are the other big problems out 
there and what environment do people think is reasonable?  Seems like 
everyone has several fast machines, many of them mobile, often being 
disconnected from one network and attached to another (or used 
disconnected).  Often people want a filesystem and cpu server on their 
portable platform.  There are lots of small ultra-mobile platforms. Energy 
use is more a concern than it was before.

Tim Newsham
http://www.lava.net/~newsham/