Erlang and code style

Re:Erlang and code style by troutwine on Wednesday May 21, 2014 @12:32AM (#7776711)

It's an interesting question. I think you'd need at least:

  * a way to define scheduling requirements on a process level (beyond current, coarse, priority settings),
  * bounded process message queues (this would be handy in soft-realtime Erlang),
  * deadline accurate receives, 
  * accurate control over resource allocation

I've been meaning to sit down with some theory and think through this more analytically, but the above are my BART thinking-time derived set of requirements. I'm sure there are cases--some which would be obvious, in retrospect--that are not covered by the above.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Erlang and code style by jacquesm on Wednesday May 21, 2014 @02:45AM (#7776984)

You'd have to run erlang directly on the hardware without an intermediary OS and you'd have to schedule the individual erlang processes using pre-emption and by giving them priorities. You'd also have to add a ready-list per priority.

After all, as long as BEAM is running as a child process of a host os that is not hard realtime you can't guarantee much of anything.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Erlang and code style by peerst on Wednesday May 21, 2014 @05:12AM (#7777268)

Well Erlang is running on RTEMS in production in industrial control systems http://www.grisp.org

Hard realtime processes to come

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Erlang and code style by troutwine on Wednesday May 21, 2014 @04:15AM (#7777127)

Of course. Apologies, I assumed that was a given. A large part of the appeal of Erlang the Language is Erlang the VM and the two aren't often divorced.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Erlang and code style by phamilton on Wednesday May 21, 2014 @09:55AM (#7778206)

Yeah, that's what I meant with LING (Erlang on xen).

[ Parent | on HN ]