Debatepoint: microkernels are better than monolithic

'microkernels are better than monolithic'

[ support:33% : certainty:30 ] · [10 replies] · [1 comment]

parent point

oppose 100% · slow

moderated to 0%; argued down by 0%
by metric on 2004-12-24 19:41:46

microkernels are slower than monolithic. Mach is like 15% slower than a monolithic kernel like Linux.

[ 2 replies · support · oppose · comment ]

oppose 100% · Re: slow

moderated to 0%; argued down by 0%
by metric on 2004-12-24 19:43:32

L3 was created to demonstrate that microkernels are not necessarily slow. L4 is a successor to L3, and only has about a 5% performance penalty compared to Linux.

[ 0 replies · support · oppose · comment ]

arguments · summary

summary

title: 'Re: slow'
text: 'L3 was created to demonstrate that microkernels are not necessarily slow. L4 is a successor to L3, and only has about a 5% performance penalty compared to Linux.'
tags:
date: 2004-12-24 19:43:32
submitter: metric
effective: 1
support: 0
oppose: 0
stancePos: 0
stanceNeg: 0
stanceEffective:
repliesSupport: 0
repliesOppose: 0
repliesTotal: 0
comments: 0

All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License.