> Creators of Erlang have a Lisp background, and one feature of the Erlang > VM (BEAM) that I'd like back-ported into Common Lisp is their process. > > An Erlang "process" is cheap to create, cheap to destroy, cheap when > blocked, and upon exit performs bulk gc of its allocated memory; e.g., > munmap(). > > Handling tens of thousands of requests per second per node isn't > uncommon, and these often have *several* workers per request or > connection: hundreds of thousands of processes. Under such scenarios, > anything less than this approach to lightweight processes might suffer > from stalls during long gc runs that would be avoided or significantly > reduced under Erlang's model. > > > How might we get equivalent cheap ephemeral processes into a > contemporary Common Lisp implementation?
In short, you need to write from scratch a new CL implementation. Current ones are not designed with the Erlang constraints in mind. -- Stelian Ionescu a.k.a. fe[nl]ix Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur. http://common-lisp.net/project/iolib