Meyer, OO and concurrency

Ulf Wiger <>
Wed Jul 13 18:24:56 CEST 2005

Den 2005-07-13 17:23:38 skrev todd <>:

> Joe Armstrong (AL/EAB) wrote:
>> But our telcoms apps do need lots of processes - say 100,000 subscribers
>> with a call model that needs 6 process/call = 600,000 processes ...
> Need vs want. I've dealt with larger numbers mapped onto a set of far  
> fewer threads with reasonable latency.

Sure, we have too. We've supported 70-80,000 active state machines
using Erlang versions that supported only 32,000 processes.
We've also gone through some iterations of finding workarounds
to the problem of not being able to use the most intuitive
model. Now, with that limit removed, we're more or less revisiting
models that we started with 9 years ago, in the earliest
prototypes. An enormous amount of work could have been saved if
we could have used the most intuitive models from the start
(This is not to be viewed as criticism. No other technology that
we knew of then, or now, could have given us better support.)

>> I don't think so. My banks uses Cobol (a lot) and C (a little) applying  
>> your argument would mean that C was weak ...
> It's not really an argument. I am just telling you what the perception  
> is from a real live person who has had these conversations within a real  
> live telecom company. The fact that things like rerouting algorithms  
> were not implemented in erlang was seen as a weakness. The fact that C++  
> could be used every level was seen as a strength.

I'm sure Joe is willing to listen to what other people
have experienced when talking to others about Erlang.
Hopefully _you_ are aware of whom it is you're trying to
educate? I believe that Joe has talked to more people,
given more courses, and fought more battles over Erlang
than most (Joe can most likely name all those who could
claim to have done more.)


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list