Re: IceBreak as an alternative to Apache?

[Joe Pluta <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

A von Neumann machine is one where the program code is modifiable.  The 
program code for the i is essentially not modifiable, hence non-von 
Neumann.  The primary upside is that program code can be shared among 
multiple jobs, since it can't be modified.

There's no opinion there, so I don't get your "must think of something 
else" remark.  Are you inferring that I consider the midrange better 
than other operating systems because they are non-won Nuemann?  I do 
think the midrange is better than any other operating system, but the 
non von-Neumann nature is only one part of that.  And to be pedantic 
about it, it's not really "non von-Neumann" since the program code can 
be updated, but only by the operating system not by application 
programs.  So calling it non-von Neumann is more of a convenience term.

And just to expand on that, whether or not read-only code is "common" is 
not really the point.  The point I was making is that the IBM midrange 
is built around this concept and takes advantage of it in many ways.  
That's why entire enterprises with hundreds of users could be (and in 
some cases still can be!) run on machines whose total memory is measured 
in megabytes, while a typical Windows user needs 4GB just for their 
desktop machine.

So, yes, other operating systems have shared code.  But like so many 
things, the i has had it for a much longer time.  The IBM i - we have 
technology before technology is cool <smile>.

Joe

> Den 31/12/10 22.23, Joe Pluta skrev:
> > Yes it does.  It's called a job.  That is the state management on the
> > i.  It's built for that, because all the jobs share the same program
> > space.  The i is a non-von Neumann design in that jobs share an
> > essentially non-modifiable program space.  Thus when you run hundred of
> Out of curiosity, why is the above a non-von Neumann design?
>
> Memory mapping shared read-only code is not uncommon these days, so you
> must think of something else.