Disadvantages, in addition to the advantages of a live environment?  The later are undeniable, and the size restrictions are probably avoidable (it can be amazing what "thinking outside the box" can allow).

Perhaps I misunderstand you.  If want to provide the current live environment experience w/o an image file, that might be a great idea - I am certainly willing to consider it.  If you want to reduce us to stateless source files (just) so we can be "like other languages," then I start to disagree.

Bill




From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Guido Stepken [gstepken@googlemail.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2012 6:13 AM
To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
Subject: [Pharo-project] Design change possible with fast SSD's possible?

Hi!

I am just reviewing some timing adjustments in Linux, which came neccessary due to the tremendous speed improvements of SSD Raid, > 1 mio IOPS, compared to fastest Barracudas disks with > 200 IOPS max.

IS there still a "Image" neccessary in Smalltalk then? Or has this former "design approach" nowerdays rather significant disadvantages? (32 Bit, hanging IO during sync, GC....)

Tnx, Guido Stepken

Am 13.01.2012 20:43 schrieb "Gast�n Dall&apos; Oglio" <gaston.dalloglio@gmail.com>:
Congratulation for the team!!!

A little comment, in the page of OpenDBX the name and link of DBXTalk are bad (SqueakDBX):