Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!samsung!usc!apple!genbank!agate!saturn!greg@cs.arizona.edu
From: greg@cs.arizona.edu (Greg Andrews)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Re: message-passing vs shared memory
Message-ID: <9828@saturn.ucsc.edu>
Date: 20 Nov 89 16:35:55 GMT
Sender: usenet@saturn.ucsc.edu
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson
Lines: 31
Approved: comp-os-research@jupiter.ucsc.edu


In article <9745@saturn.ucsc.edu>, mendozag@ee.ecn.purdue.edu (Victor M Mendoza-Grado) writes:
> 
>  I am trying to recall the reference where the set of primitives
>  for message-passing and for shared memory mechanisms are shown
>  to be equivalent in power. I that thought maybe someone in the net
>  can lend a hand, which I'll appreciate very much.
>   
>  I barely remember it was included in one of the LNCS volumes,
>  but I might be wrong.
> 

I believe the reference you want is the "duality" paper:

	Lauer, H.C and Needham, R.M.  On the duality of
	operating system structures.  In Proc. 2nd Int.
	Symposium on Operating Systems (IRIA, Paris,
	Oct. 1978); reprinted in Operating Systems Review 13,
	2 (April 1979), 3-19.

That paper points out the duality between monitors and
message passing in terms both of expressive power and
performance (at least of the user's code).

This topic, and several others, is also surveyed in
a recent paper of mine that readers of this news group
might be interested in:

	Andrews, G.R.  Paradigms for process interaction
	in distributed programs.  TR 89-24, Dept. of Computer
	Science, The Univeristy of Arizona, October 1989.