On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:45:53 EDT erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > i'm assuming by "core file" you don't mean executable. > plan 9 already keeps an executable cache.
It contains executable code but it is not an executable in the sense you don't directly feed it to exec(2). A lisp process might add new functions and dump a new core image file. A later lisp process will have those functions available to it. One can even choose a diff. core file to start with. > > Presumably the reads are cached? > > reads are not cached. read on plan 9 is syncronous. > there is no block cache. > > > Even so, there will the cost of copying to the segment. Or can > > one create multiple text and data segments in some way so > > that stuff will be paged in as necessary? Also, if a shared > > segment is created won't the forked processes be able to > > modify this segment? Ideally one would like a private copy > > for each child. Is segattach + read the best (only?) way to > > do this? > > why wouldn't you use ramfs? You mean to cache the core file in memory? That can work... Thanks!
