Process (computing) - History

History

See also: History of operating systems

By the early 1960s computer control software had evolved from Monitor control software, e.g., IBSYS, to Executive control software. Computers got "faster" and computer time was still neither "cheap" nor fully used. It made multiprogramming possible and necessary.

Multiprogramming means that several programs run "at the same time" (concurrently, including parallel and non-parallel). At first they ran on a single processor (i.e., uniprocessor) and shared scarce resources. Multiprogramming is also basic form of multiprocessing, a much broader term.

Programs consist of sequences of instructions for processors. A single processor can run only one instruction at a time: it is impossible to run more programs at the same time. A program might need some resource (input ...) which has a large delay, or a program might start some slow operation (output to printer ...). This would lead to processor being "idle" (unused). To use processor at all times, the execution of such a program is halted. At that point, a second (or nth) program is started or restarted. To the user, it will appear that the programs run at the same time (hence the term, concurrent).

Shortly thereafter, the notion of a 'program' was expanded to the notion of an 'executing program and its context'. The concept of a process was born.

This became necessary with the invention of re-entrant code.

Threads came somewhat later. However, with the advent of time-sharing; computer networks; multiple-CPU, shared memory computers; etc., the old "multiprogramming" gave way to true multitasking, multiprocessing and, later, multithreading.

Read more about this topic:  Process (computing)

Famous quotes containing the word history:

    “... in America ... children are instructed in the virtues of the system they live under, as though history had achieved a happy ending in American civics.”
    —Mary McCarthy (1912–1989)

    “Look through the whole history of countries professing the Romish religion, and you will uniformly find the leaven of this besetting and accursed principle of action—that the end will sanction any means.”
    —Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772–1834)

    “Considered in its entirety, psychoanalysis won’t do. It’s an end product, moreover, like a dinosaur or a zeppelin; no better theory can ever be erected on its ruins, which will remain for ever one of the saddest and strangest of all landmarks in the history of twentieth-century thought.”
    —Peter B. Medawar (1915–1987)