3 Apr
2013
3 Apr
'13
2:29 p.m.
On 4/2/13 8:30 AM, "Fred Cisin" <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
On Tue, 2 Apr 2013, Sam O'nella wrote:
As I understand it, a certain large software company of my acquaintance
uses the mandatory reboot as a convenience, rather than determining
whether affected components are in fact in use. Easier for the programmer
- sorry, user! You don't matter.
Has it had a kernel update ever? Uptime can often
mean vulnerable
services too.
It is possible to design a system that does not require rebooting when
replacing a component that is not currently in use.
If the interface of the component is adequately stabilized and documented,
that "not in use" could even be an interrupt.
Memory space garbage collection, when properly done, does NOT require
rebooting.
But systems that screw up on releasing allocated resources when they
are no longer needed, NEED a complete restart periodically.