3 ms·

That's not really a fair comparison: Windows I/O completion ports are a proprietary standard that is part of the NT kernel, while POSIX AIO is just a user-space

by wogna 9y ago

That's not really a fair comparison: Windows I/O completion ports are a proprietary standard that is part of the NT kernel, while POSIX AIO is just a user-space libc extension that was added later on (as far as I know, none of the kernel-space posix AIO proposals got merged in). It's easier to get things right when you defined your own standards, at the cost of portability. But even then, you might argue that that completion ports are less than ideal: you incur a lot of complexity in the file system drivers, while e.g. solaris/BSD offer similar functionality without that burden. I'm not familiar with BeOS at all, but browsing through Haiku's API documentation I can't really find much. What exactly were you referring to?

Victoria454 9y ago
I just got paid $6784 working off my laptop this month. And if you think that's cool, my divorced friend has twin toddlers and made over $9k her first month. It feels so good making so much money when other people have to work for so much less. This is what I do,====http://bit.do/dnRs5 http://bit.do/dnRs5
andrewbinstock 9y ago
If you're talking about Linux specifically, that's not quite accurate history. Prior to POSIX threads, Linux had it's own threading model--Linux Threads--which frankly was terrible. They added the full POSIX later on in part b/c the Linux threading was so awful. [1] has more detail. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LinuxThreads https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LinuxThreads
- wogna 9y ago
  True that, but I was talking about the POSIX async I/O API: http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/aio.h.html http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/aio.... I don't know much about the LinuxThreads-era.
- cesarb 9y ago
  Both LinuxThreads and the current NPTL are implementations of POSIX threads. NPTL is closer to the standard, but if your code doesn't need the stricter conformance, it could run on either with no changes.
srean 9y ago
Proprietary or not is something quite orthogonal to my comment. I was commenting on the design of the API, its implementation and the leak of the abstractions used etc. etc. Async was never Unix's strength, plan9 might have fixed matters somewhat if it caught on.

by wogna 9y ago

Victoria454 9y ago

I just got paid $6784 working off my laptop this month. And if you think that's cool, my divorced friend has twin toddlers and made over $9k her first month. It feels so good making so much money when other people have to work for so much less. This is what I do,====http://bit.do/dnRs5 http://bit.do/dnRs5

andrewbinstock 9y ago

If you're talking about Linux specifically, that's not quite accurate history. Prior to POSIX threads, Linux had it's own threading model--Linux Threads--which frankly was terrible. They added the full POSIX later on in part b/c the Linux threading was so awful. [1] has more detail. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LinuxThreads https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LinuxThreads

wogna 9y ago
True that, but I was talking about the POSIX async I/O API: http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/aio.h.html http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/aio.... I don't know much about the LinuxThreads-era.
cesarb 9y ago
Both LinuxThreads and the current NPTL are implementations of POSIX threads. NPTL is closer to the standard, but if your code doesn't need the stricter conformance, it could run on either with no changes.

srean 9y ago

Proprietary or not is something quite orthogonal to my comment. I was commenting on the design of the API, its implementation and the leak of the abstractions used etc. etc. Async was never Unix's strength, plan9 might have fixed matters somewhat if it caught on.