User talk:Lionel/What kind of kernel should I make?: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Content added Content deleted
(Created page with "I have a problem with the notion of "monolithic == unstable". For one, stability relies very much on the quality of code. The monolithic architecture is ''statistically'' more...") |
(→Reply:Solar: new section) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I have a problem with the notion of "monolithic == unstable". For one, stability relies very much on the quality of code. The monolithic architecture is ''statistically'' more prone to kernel crashes than a microkernel ''if'' both have the same code quality. Two, while a microkernel might not experience ''kernel'' crashes as often, it takes quite some skill to have your system recover from, say, a crash of the filesystem server. If your system is rendered inoperable, it doesn't matter much if it was the kernel or a user-space process to blame... Hence, and to avoid rants like this very one, I would attempt to tender my statements a bit, not taking sides. -- [[User:Solar|Solar]] 04:14, 25 June 2012 (CDT) |
I have a problem with the notion of "monolithic == unstable". For one, stability relies very much on the quality of code. The monolithic architecture is ''statistically'' more prone to kernel crashes than a microkernel ''if'' both have the same code quality. Two, while a microkernel might not experience ''kernel'' crashes as often, it takes quite some skill to have your system recover from, say, a crash of the filesystem server. If your system is rendered inoperable, it doesn't matter much if it was the kernel or a user-space process to blame... Hence, and to avoid rants like this very one, I would attempt to tender my statements a bit, not taking sides. -- [[User:Solar|Solar]] 04:14, 25 June 2012 (CDT) |
||
== Reply:Solar == |
|||
Solar, I completely agree. |
|||
Revision as of 22:57, 25 June 2012
I have a problem with the notion of "monolithic == unstable". For one, stability relies very much on the quality of code. The monolithic architecture is statistically more prone to kernel crashes than a microkernel if both have the same code quality. Two, while a microkernel might not experience kernel crashes as often, it takes quite some skill to have your system recover from, say, a crash of the filesystem server. If your system is rendered inoperable, it doesn't matter much if it was the kernel or a user-space process to blame... Hence, and to avoid rants like this very one, I would attempt to tender my statements a bit, not taking sides. -- Solar 04:14, 25 June 2012 (CDT)
Reply:Solar
Solar, I completely agree.