Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!ucbvax!BRL.MIL!gwyn
From: gwyn@BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn, VLD/VMB)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo
Subject: Re:  Apollo DOMAIN/IX csh question - job control
Message-ID: <8807291712.aa06265@VGR.BRL.MIL>
Date: 29 Jul 88 21:12:36 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 14

Excuse me, but whatever your model of a "process" (or a "job",
represented in UNIX by a shared process group ID), the additional
control required for a job control shell should not add noticeable
overhead.  The only time different behavior is required is when a
job control-related interrupt is generated (usually by a keypress);
plus when a controlled process is spawned there is a tiny amount of
extra bookkeeping in the shell.  The original comment was that job
control on the Apollo caused unacceptable EXECUTION overhead, which
is hard to justify given that the CPU cycles and system services
should be virtually unaffected by the requirements of job control.

This was not meant to start a flame war.  I still don't know why
job control would add noticeable execution overhead on an Apollo,
if in fact it does.