[DGD] DGD and *dbm

[Felix A. Croes]

Shentino <shentino at gmail.com> wrote:

> Speaking of "even non-atomic threads getting rolled back under MP",
> how are we going to consistently be able to access the filesystem?
>
> I remember a "recent" change to allow DGD to interact with named 
> pipes, sockets, and other such things that have *read side effects*.
>
> I'm assuming that FS access will become a critical section of some
> sort, or buffered like user object I/O, but I'd like to hear it from
> the horse's mouth exactly how DGD/MP will behave from the filesystem's
> point of view.

>From the filesystem's point of view, there is no difference between
DGD and DGD/MP.

>From DGD/MP's point of view, file reads will be inefficient and
file writes (or reads with side effects) will be very inefficient,
progressively more so for a larger number of processors.

Regards,
Dworkin