Replacing C

[Eric S. Raymond]

Kurt Roeckx <kurt at roeckx.be>:
> I had a quick look at some of the stats of my peers over internet,
> and most actually seem to have an average jitter in the order of
> around 100 microseconds. Some are lower, some are higher. So I'm
> not sure how I feel about adding an other 100 to that.

OK, fair point.

The rule in my head has been that for whatever jitter maximum we want
to hit, we need the the 95th-percentile value of the stop-the-world
bound to to be an order of magnitude below that.

I was shooting for 1ms jitter because that's a comfortable order of
magnitude before the RFC5905 implied bound of "a few tens of
milliseconds"; thus 100ms.

You just told me I need to aim smaller.  Following your report, for a
language to be eligible that bound must now be 10us or less.

Recent Go can make that nut and have an factor of five headroom, and
of course Rust can since it has no stop-the-world pauses at all. Given
Erlang's primal use case I'd be a little surprised if it's not good
enough - need to research that.  Java and most other interpreters with
GC would probably fail miserably.
-- 
		<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>