Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 22 Feb 2003 19:00:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 22 Feb 2003 19:00:04 -0500 Received: from e1.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.101]:14538 "EHLO e1.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 22 Feb 2003 19:00:03 -0500 To: Larry McVoy cc: William Lee Irwin III , Mark Hahn , "Martin J. Bligh" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Reply-To: Gerrit Huizenga From: Gerrit Huizenga Subject: Re: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call In-reply-to: Your message of Sat, 22 Feb 2003 15:28:59 PST. <20030222232859.GC31268@work.bitmover.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <19036.1045958955.1@us.ibm.com> Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 16:09:15 -0800 Message-Id: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1077 Lines: 24 On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 15:28:59 PST, Larry McVoy wrote: > On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 02:17:39PM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 22, 2003 at 05:06:27PM -0500, Mark Hahn wrote: > > > ccNUMA worst-case latencies are not much different from decent > > > cluster (message-passing) latencies. > > > > Not even close, by several orders of magnitude. > > Err, I think you're wrong. It's been a long time since I looked, but I'm > pretty sure myrinet had single digit microseconds. Yup, google rocks, > 7.6 usecs, user to user. Last I checked, Sequents worst case was around > there, right? You are going to drag 1994 technology into this to compare against something in 2003? Hmm. You might win on that comparison. But yeah, Sequent way back then was in that ballpark. World has moved forwards since then... gerrit - 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/