> Ah, now we back to the whole BFS debate. No, I have no benchmarks present.
Well, then you don't really have a point, do you?
> Sure. It's typical problems for real programs.
Again, do you have any data to back this up? Because I really doubt that this is a problem for 99% of all applications.
> Because these are the same "wizards from Ivory Tower" that proclaimed 20 years ago "Among the people who actually design operating systems, the debate is essentially over. Microkernels have won."
> This was nice theory but practice is different. In practice two out of three surviving major OSes are microkernel-based only in name and one is not microkernel at all.
That doesn't mean anything as long as you don't show that the failure of microkernel based OSes on the desktop can be attributed directly to the microkernel design. There may well have been other factors: inertia, lack of hardware and software vendors, bad luck etc.. Also, microkernels were actually a success in the embedded world. QNX is just one example of this.