Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO
From: Doug Scott (dwscott_at_ieee.org)
Date: 01/03/04
- Next message: Doug Scott: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Previous message: Judson McClendon: "Re: No panic - but .. Y2K + 4"
- In reply to: Peter E.C. Dashwood: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Next in thread: Howard Brazee: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 13:23:06 GMT
Peter,
> There is no reason why a real time system CAN'T produce scheduled snapshots.
> The two are NOT mutually exclusive.
[Puzzled] True. It would be a nonsense to expend real-time resources to do it,
but I do know systems where it's done - they dynamically lower the run
priority, if they're at all clever.
But it's a batch process.
--- Doug dwscott@ieee.org
- Next message: Doug Scott: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Previous message: Judson McClendon: "Re: No panic - but .. Y2K + 4"
- In reply to: Peter E.C. Dashwood: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Next in thread: Howard Brazee: "Re: (not entirely...) OT: OPINION... chicken entrails, runic stones, and crystal balls... WAS CoBOL moved to OO"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|