[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Persistence Pros and Cons
From: |
Christopher Nelson |
Subject: |
RE: Persistence Pros and Cons |
Date: |
Wed, 2 Nov 2005 09:42:43 -0700 |
> > Why would state need to be serializable?
>
> I meant: in a non-persistent system. The reason for my
> question is that Jonathan concluded that persistence is
> mostly "a matter of taste".
> Passive translators seem to be a counter-example.
>
Ah. Well, it seems to me that capabilities must not be serializable. If they
could be, what would stop a thread from modifying the capabilities as they
flowed back to the kernel? If the serializing entity was part of the TCB, then
you have to implement a certain amount of persistence anyway. Once you start
implementing persistence by degrees you run into a whole bunch of edge cases
where it's just easier to implement system-wide persistence anyway. That's
been my experience, in any case.
-={C}=-
RE: Persistence Pros and Cons,
Christopher Nelson <=
- Re: Persistence Pros and Cons, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/11/02
- Re: Persistence Pros and Cons, olafBuddenhagen, 2005/11/04
- Re: Persistence Pros and Cons, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/11/04
- Re: Persistence Pros and Cons, olafBuddenhagen, 2005/11/05
- Re: Persistence Pros and Cons, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/11/05
- Re: Persistence Pros and Cons, olafBuddenhagen, 2005/11/07
- Re: Persistence Pros and Cons, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/11/07
RE: Persistence Pros and Cons, Christopher Nelson, 2005/11/02