I'm involved in a seminar from 10 AM to 9 PM today and tomorrow and competing in a 4 day agility trial Thursday through Monday. Along with that I have to read every post in 4 forums. If you want to wait that long then maybe we can discuss it. But if you really want to know, I am sure that you know how to use Google. Besides, your questions don't seem so innocent.
Tom
Sure, I am taking off for a weekend of camping (1st trip of the year. Finally!) so I won't be back for a few days anyhow. As for the "innocence" of the questions, I am not sure what you mean. You said that the NT kernel must go and related that the architecture was why. I am sincerely curious as to what it is about the architecture that makes it untenable in your opinion and what/why's of the architecture you would choose.
hermant wrote: Another HUGE advantage of the message based software architecture is scalability.
Thanks - scalability - was the word that I could not get my brain to come up with. That's how the messaging cost was overcome by Tandem Computers in the 70's (now HP NonStop Servers). Linear scalability of up to 16 CPUs per system with a messaging system that seamlessly spans CPUs is the trick. The systems also scale linearly and, with the messaging system also spanning systems seamlessly, you can basically throw as much hardware as you like at any problem without modifying one line of software code.
Dave
Life doesn't come with a safety fence around it... enjoy it anyway.
Offline
