> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
> [mailto:owner-linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu]On Behalf Of The Galaxy
> Ranger
> Sent: Monday, November 30, 1998 10:38 AM
> To: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
> Subject: Re: SMP scalability: 8 -> 32 CPUs
>
>
> On Mon, 30 Nov 1998, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Sun, 29 Nov 1998 16:45:17 -0500 (GMT), ramak@wipinfo.soft.net
> > (Ramakrishna K) said:
> >
> > > Also just a general question from curiosity perspective, is the
> > > performance of a cluster of these boxes better than a say 1024
> > > way SMP box. This is assuming we are able to scale it to say 1024
> > > CPUs. This is vis-a-vis compared to a cluster involving SMP boxes
> > > ( totally adding upto 1024 CPU's ).
> >
> > You simply cannot answer a question like that! Let me restate your
> > question:
> >
> > "Let's assume that we invent some mechanism for binding 1024
> > cpus into a single box. I know it doesn't exist yet, but how
> > fast will it be?"
> >
> > Binding that many CPUs together is hard! You tell me how you plan to do
> > it, and _then_ I'll tell you whether clustering is faster. :)
> >
> > --Stephen
>
> With all this talk of Linux not scaling past 8 CPUs, does this
> imply that Linux will never be ported to the connection machine?
> It is Sparc based after all. Speaking of which.... Sun borrowed
> that technology when designing the E10000. Does that mean if
> you load Linux up on that system you will only be able to
> use 8 of the 64 CPUs?
>
> David F. Newman
> buzzwang@ourvillage.com
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/