Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 22 Feb 2003 16:56:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 22 Feb 2003 16:56:20 -0500 Received: from coffee.Psychology.mcmaster.ca ([130.113.218.59]:6064 "EHLO coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 22 Feb 2003 16:56:19 -0500 Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 17:06:27 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Hahn X-X-Sender: hahn@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca To: "Martin J. Bligh" cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call In-Reply-To: <2080000.1045947731@[10.10.2.4]> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1162 Lines: 27 > OK, so now you've slid from talking about PCs to 2-way to 4-way ... > perhaps because your original arguement was fatally flawed. oh, come on. the issue is whether memory is fast and flat. most "scalability" efforts are mainly trying to code around the fact that any ccNUMA (and most 4-ways) is going to be slow/bumpy. it is reasonable to worry that optimizations for imbalanced machines will hurt "normal" ones. is it worth hurting uni by 5% to give a 50% speedup to IBM's 32-way? I think not, simply because low-end machines are more important to Linux. the best way to kill Linux is to turn it into an OS best suited for $6+-digit machines. > For applications that don't work well on clusters, you have no real ccNUMA worst-case latencies are not much different from decent cluster (message-passing) latencies. getting an app to work on a cluster is a matter of programming will. regards, mark hahn. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/