|I've successfully installed FullPliant on a 486sx with 16 MB or RAM
and an ISA bus.
It's painfully slow to precompile (roughly one hour), but when started,
it runs smoothly. I was also suprised about the fact it does not swap,
and it responds fast (unless the requested page requires to compile more
code). So, now, it behaves as the main router here !
- Internet and wan access though an Hisax passive ISDN card.
- Home automation (driving my 20 years old central heating)
- DNS (caching)
- HTTP (for administration through the secured proxy)
The FullPliant installation process is improving rapidely, so I expect
to provide download of custom (you will fill a form describing you computer,
and the server will build a ready to run, fully configured system) CD ISO
image by the end of the year.
Not too bad.
Please describe the FullPliant OS.
Are you running:
a. Pliant as the kernel on X86 hardware
b. Linux kernel on X86 hardware with Pliant compiled in the kernel (similar to TUX)?
c. Pliant JVM implementation
d. None of the above
I am confused as to the implementation...
How is the performance on the hardware(486 16mb Ram)?
I gather that you can run the core Pliant Applications?
(HTTP, DNS, Networking(Routing), FTP, SMTP, POP3
Any documents or details of the system? (Notes, Plans or Other?)
I am interested in understanding more about the implementation.
Thanks in advance,
Theodore E. Patrick
|Sorry for the late answer: I had not subscribed this forum because I thought
I was the only poster.
> a. Pliant as the kernel on X86 hardware
Never: the main reason is that a kernel mainly (also it's not the most
exciting part of it) deals with the large set of potencially crazy peaces
of hardware available for PCs.
Pliant is disruptive from Unix because I think there is much to win with
getting rid of the 30 years history. So, at application level, Pliant
services tend to be more consistent, so easier to maintain and customize
for peticular needs. There is a great win in this area so it worses (in
my opinion) the cost of the restart from scratch.
On the kernel side, also restarting from scatch could bring small improvements
in some areas, you have to carry the drivers part, and the cost overflaws
the potencial win, still in my mind.
This are two main reason for using Linux kernel for FullPliant, rather than
other availables ones (FreeBSD and OpenBSD):
- license (the GPL is granting a much better futur than BSD)
- hardware support
So, some people with different goals (performances for FreeBSD, and security
with for OpenBSD), may get a different conclusion, but as I simply need
an absolutely stable kernel for mainstream PC, Linux (ironed out by Alan)
with software RAID is perfect for Pliant.
> b. Linux kernel on X86 hardware with Pliant compiled in the kernel (similar to TUX)?
Pliant will never bring the kind of stability a Linux kernel may have, and
the simple reason is that the goals are different: in the kernel, you do
low level simple services so you use simple and very slow evolving design
(Linus is perfectly awared about this), whereas at application area,
you want more advanced features so you cannot achieve the same level of
As a result, a FullPliant server which is two layers is perfect for real
world production: if the application crashes, the kernel will remain alive
and enable to restart all services within a few seconds.
Since the file system is handled by the kernel, and the Pliant database
engine is crash proof (a crash will not corrupt of loose any data), it
brings a very consistent overall behaviour.
Another reason is that Pliant is currently not targeted for top performances,
but rather reasonable performances and top flexibility thanks to short
> c. Pliant JVM implementation
JVM is not low level enough to enable Pliant execution.
> How is the performance on the hardware(486 16mb Ram)?
Well, compiling is painfully slow, but applications tend to run
surprisingly well, so it's a good personal server, but would be
completely unusable for development.
> I gather that you can run the core Pliant Applications?
(HTTP, DNS, Networking(Routing), FTP, SMTP, POP3
> Any documents or details of the system? (Notes, Plans or Other?)
The next year Plan is to introduce the graphical toolkit over the Linux
frame buffer, and the web browser, so that FullPliant will also be a
solution for people that want a simple client.
Then, I plan to study HTML extensions the other way round: rather than
on the client side (so basically reduce the traffic with the server),
I will look for ways to update rather than completely resend the page
on the client, using a very simple protocol such as labelling HTML tree
nodes, then changing selected subtrees, and it should be enough to bring
full desktop capabilities using the HTTP/HTML.
For the Pliant web browser, it will be built in, and for other browsers,
I might introduce a proxy that will hide the extensions to the browser,
just like I currently do for strong crypto.