Can extra processing threads help in this case?
in [MFC]
|
From: Hector Santos on 26 Mar 2010 03:26 Peter Olcott wrote: > > You and Joe did give me some excellent help, and I really > appreciate that. The idea to base my web application on HTTP > was the best. I do not appreciate the rudeness, and > denigration. We don't appreciate you telling us to prove something that is pretty much common knowledge about Windows programming, and furthermore, we don't appreciate when you still don't believe us and we advise you explore all yourself even to he extent of providing simulation code and you still hassle us about it without even exploring it. When you finally did partially some testing, you have kiddie BUGS and still come back to us to help you figure it out. Then you tried to front us with some fictitious Specialty Group that has all the answers, and LIED about they were agreeing with you. When asked to tell us what group was this, silence. And even if you still didn't believe us, it isn't like the world is void of this information. This is all out there in googleland and you were given countless links, all ignored. But its all there, yet you still refuse to believe anything. And thing finally, in the end you finally said you did know about something about all this, but forgot because you never studied the 2nd half of some book for a canceled exam on operating systems. Talk about Virtual Memory! Rude? Your behavior is nothing short of being rude. -- HLS
From: Oliver Regenfelder on 26 Mar 2010 04:44 Hello, Peter Olcott wrote: > I am trying to derive a new business model for > commercializing software. I want to make it so that people > can rent software for a tiny cost per use. I wouldn't call that itself a _new_ businessmodell. There is all that google stuff that comes for free, there is online photoshop, I think sometime ago there were rumors about an online office from microsoft. But maybe your approach is different. Best regards, Oliver
From: Oliver Regenfelder on 26 Mar 2010 04:51 Hello, Peter Olcott wrote: > If the most RAM it can possibly need is 1 GB, and it has 4 > GB then it seems crazy to page anything out. How is this not > crazy? 1) The OS never knows how much RAM an application will possibly need. 2) It may page out the data and still keep the pages in RAM. This way, when the moment comes that the pages have to be paged out they already are. Essentially you are doing page outs in your idle time so that you don't have to do it later. And when you are using good heuristics, then this saves time. Best regads, Oliver
From: Oliver Regenfelder on 26 Mar 2010 04:55 Hello, Peter Olcott wrote: > I don't know. It does not yet seem worth the learning curve > cost. The process is intended to be always running and > loaded with data. I would say using memory mapped files with e.g. boost is not that steep a learning curve. Best regards, Oliver
From: Peter Olcott on 26 Mar 2010 10:32
"Pete Delgado" <Peter.Delgado(a)NoSpam.com> wrote in message news:eSOGleKzKHA.264(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > > "Liviu" <lab2k1(a)gmail.c0m> wrote in message > news:eUt13uGzKHA.5332(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> "Pete Delgado" <Peter.Delgado(a)NoSpam.com> wrote... >>> >>> I believe that your interpretation of "fault tolerance" >>> is that a >>> catastrophic event could happen to your system and you >>> application >>> would not lose *any* data. Is this the definition that >>> you are using? >> >> Absent any catastrophic events, a system might still be >> called >> "fault tolerant" if it managed at least one successful >> run under >> controlled conditions on developer's machine, despite all >> faults >> with its design and implementation ;-) > > Given his level of understanding, I sincerely doubt that > his system can possibly overcome all of the faults that > you mention! ;-) > > -Pete > Since many of these require redundant hardware and my initial budget can not afford redundant hardware these other faults will not be initially accounted for. My understanding would be much better if people would explain their underlying reasoning. |