Talk:Banker's algorithm

See also is for irrelevant resources (?) OK, can be. But for relevant as well? (Primarily for relevant) --Premil 14:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely. I missed an extra 'also' in my edit comment. Mark Hurd 15:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

C Implementation Crashes

The linked C program crashes and burns (bus error) when requesting resources for a process. Compiled with "gcc -o bankers bankers.c" on Mac OS X. 12.165.3.118 (talk) 14:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Banker's rounding link

What does the Banker's rounding link have to do with deadlock avoidance?

Nothing, but some who type Banker's algorithm to the search box may want to read about Banker's rounding instead of deadlock avoidance. Torzsmokus (talk) 17:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article plagurised?

This entire article looks suspiciously similar to the explaination of Banker's algorithm in "Operating System Concepts" by Silberschatz, Galvin, and Gagne (pages 259-261 of the 7th edition). Everything from the structure of the article to most of the wording, with a few changes, is no different from this copyrighted work. I'm assuming this shouldn't be?

Indeed it should not. I have now rewritten the article from scratch as a stub article using multiple sources, and added a reference to the source you cite above for further reading. -- The Anome 12:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added algorithm section

I added a large section describing how the algorithm works. I wrote this from my memory of the algorithm from my operating systems class. I did check with some websites and my textbook (which I cited) to make sure I wasn't too far off. Still, it would help if someone else could double check everything, (especially to make sure it is clear enough and not too technical). Also, I didn't want to remove the stub tag myself, but there might be enough information now to do so. MagiMaster 07:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Habermann's "Prevention of System Deadlocks"?

I'm not sure how this paper diverges from the banker's algorithm. It says that it is a generalization:

Acknowledgment. The deadlock problem occurred to
me for the first time when E. W. Dijkstra gave a practical solution of the problem for a special purpose [1]. Later on, I had the pleasure of discussing a general solution of the problem with him when I wrote my thesis.

(where [1] is "De Bankiers Algorithm"), but I don't see the difference between what that paper and this article describe. Anyone? -Slamb 01:15, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OT: what about hyperlinking math symbols

hi, since i don't really have a clue where to say this i say it here: what about hyperlinking math symbols (excuse my ignorance if they're not known by this name) like in "foreach (p ∈ P)", while as a programmer i can guess what it means, i'm rather weak on math (isn't this clear by now) so if "∈" linked to a page explaining what it is i'd (hopefully) understand it. just an idea, bye and thanks to you all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.50.67.217 (talk) 21:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Broken Pseudo-code?

I am no expert on the Banking Algorithm(i came here to learn it), but am i correct in assuming if ANY process cannot terminate, then the state is considered unsafe? If so, the Pseudo-code is incorrect. The found variable is set to TRUE whenever a process is checked and can terminate. It is never set to FALSE after being initialized. Thus, the Pseudo-code algorithm only indicates an unsafe state if ALL the processes cannot terminate, not ANY. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.98.213.69 (talk) 12:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]