In message: <bf689bbe0905160731he199751t1b9212a526ea2...@mail.gmail.com> Bob Paddock <bob.padd...@gmail.com> writes: : On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Chuck Harris <cfhar...@erols.com> wrote: : > Bob Paddock wrote: : > : >> Anyone ever look at Minix-III (Minix-I was the progenitor to Linux)? : >> Seems like it would be easy to make a decent time server, on : >> embedded hardware with it. Past iterations of the Minix-III website : >> gave a "watch" as an example small embedded system it was meant to : >> power. : : > Why do you think Minix-III would be a good candidate for a time server? : : Minix-III is based on the microkernel approach of keeping things small and fast. : Take a look at the web site. http://www.minix3.org/
Right. But microkernels add latency to the dispatching of events. And the latency tends to be variable in a typical microkernel. Variable latency degrades performance. I've not measured minix3, so I don't know if it suffers from this problem or not. Even in a monolithic kernel you have issues with as well, since interrupts can be masked from time to time... Warner _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.