Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 14:28:56 11/09/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 09, 1999 at 17:07:01, Pete Galati wrote: [snip] >Sounds like it makes more sense, I'm assuming that you'd have a separate >proccessor organizing organizing the 3 threads mentioned. When you say "message >passing machines and other non SMP architectures" this is terms unclear to me, >but how I interpret that is that you'd have completely separate computers >networked together. Works for lots of things. Many multiple CPU machines do not have SMP. For a design like I propose, that is fine because the work units are separable and somewhat independent. >There was an atricle in Linux Journal many months ago about somebody who had a >large amount of PC tower computers somehow networked together to use as a >substitute for a mainframe monster, it was said to be more economical, but it >looked like a nightmare to me. I don't remember any details, it was all over my >head. Probably Beowulf
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.