3 ms·

For quite a while now I've wondered why we do this. We take a physical computer and put a program on it that slices the machine up into multi-tenant abstraction

For quite a while now I've wondered why we do this. We take a physical computer and put a program on it that slices the machine up into multi-tenant abstractions called 'processes' so you can run more than one. Then somebody runs just one program on that machine in a process that uses all the machine that then slices the machine up into multi-tenant abstractions called 'X' (for various versions of X - isolates, containers, Erlang Actors, Database triggers). If the Unix process abstraction is no longer fit for all purposes, why don't we get around to de-layering the operating system so that the Unix process abstraction is just another 'Virtual Machine' sat on top of something more fundamental? Is it time for the return of the pure hypervisor?

runeks 8y ago
> If the Unix process abstraction is no longer fit for all purposes [...] Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but the Unix process abstraction was never meant to isolate processes from each other. It was designed to allow multiple processes to run on the same machine. On the other hand, the Unix OS was indeed designed to isolate itself from processes running on other Unix OS'es, which is exactly why we use the entire OS as the container of processes that need to be isolated.
blasdel 8y ago
You're asking for unikernels, which have had a recent renaissance: http://unikernel.org/projects/ http://unikernel.org/projects/ Some of the density advantages depended on Paravirtualization, which is quite difficult to make safe against Meltdown: https://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-254.html https://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-254.html