Re: Docker

On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 14:11:12 -0500
Tim Daneliuk <tundra@tundraware.com> wrote:

> This model is not useful for everything.   There have been
> attempts, for example, to decompose the FreeBSD kernel itself into
> a set of loosely coupled services coordinated via message
> passing.  If memory services, this was the intent of
> DragonflyBSD but I'm not certain of that.

	Not DragonflyBSD but the Mach kernel is a message passing
microkernel and is used in MacOS with a largely FreeBSD based set of unix
userland and of course Aqua.

	DragonflyBSD is something else, it's still monolithic but it
handles SMP very differently to FreeBSD (this being the point of departure
of the project). The original plan to move to message passing as the
basis for native SSI clustering fell by the wayside very early in favour of
extremely efficient SMP and the Hammer filesystem. Judging by benchmarks of
systems with large numbers of CPUs they have managed to make the kernel
scale extremely well.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith <steve@sohara.org>