[E-Lang] remote comms: Timeouts and Connection Failure

[Mark S. Miller]

> At 09:37 PM 4/2/01 -0700, Dean Tribble wrote:
> >As I recall the motivating case for breaking all the promises is amnesia.

At Tuesday, April 03, 2001 2:01 AM Tyler Close wrote:
> I am sort of reluctant to get into this, since both E and EROS believe in
> allowing amnesia. I think supporting amnesia is ridiculous. It totally
> undermines security and makes a mess of distributed application logic.
>
> As far as I know, E and EROS only have performance reasons for allowing
> amnesia. This is a poor argument. Droplets does not suffer from amnesia and
> does just fine on performance, despite being implemented on top of Java.
>  From Java, it takes me approximately 20 to 40 ms to sync modified state to
> disk. This time is dwarfed by network latency. A system implemented on top
> of the bare hardware should be able to make the comparison even sillier.

If you would open source Lock, I would be overjoyed to stop worrying about 
amnesia, and I would be happy to specify E under amnesia-free assumptions.

If not, do you know of another open source persistence solution suitable for 
E's needs, and with performance adequate for ignoring amnesia?

If not, then I've got to engineer solutions that work within the constraints 
of the other solutions I can afford to engineer.  If I've got to roll my own 
persistence solution, even if I start from your Acid interface, I am not 
going to spend the level of effort needed for this level of performance.  
It's hard, and I greatly admire you for succeeding at it.  But what would 
you have me do for E?

        Cheers,
        --MarkM