Why so little parallelism?
|
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler on 12 Nov 2006 11:55 eugene(a)cse.ucsc.edu (Eugene Miya) writes: > I wonder how the storage war is going to shape up? > Will tape really die as Jim Gray predicts or will tape drives be > relgated to data retrieval devices or one last read off tape? re: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006u.html#19 Why so little parallelism the many times descendent of CMSBACK that i originally implemented and deployed in the late 70s ... also referenced here http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006t.html#20 Why these original FORTRAN quirks? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006t.html#24 CMSBACK http://www.almaden.ibm.com/StorageSystems/Past_Projects/TSM.shtml has multiple levels that don't need to touch tape at all. some general collected posts mentioning that activity http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#backup and product page http://www-306.ibm.com/software/tivoli/products/storage-mgr/ part of the tape issue is packaging/density/convenience/cost ... for some things datacenter and transmission costs have been reduced to the point where it is cost effective to have a hot remote/redundant sites .... as opposed to disaster/recovery dependent on offsite backup tapes. when we were doing our ha/cmp product http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hacmp we coined the term disaster survivability and geographic survivability for concurrent operation of remote/redundant sites. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#available part of this had been outlined by my wife when she had done peer-to-peer shared data architecture when she served her stint in pok in charge of loosely-coupled architecture. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#shareddata at that time, she saw very little uptake ... except for the IMS (database) group for IMS hot standby. not that long ago, we were taling to one of the major financial transaction operations and they attributed their 100percent availability over a span of years to * automated operator * ims hot standby where they had triple redundant/remote dataprocessing sites. misc. past posts mentioning ims hot standby http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#35a Drive letters http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#37 What is MVS/ESA? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#71 High Availabilty on S/390 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#77 Are mainframes relevant ?? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#92 MVS vs HASP vs JES (was 2821) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#128 Examples of non-relational databases http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#13 Computer of the century http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#54 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#71 Pentium 4 Prefetch engine? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#13 HP-UX will not be ported to Alpha (no surprise)exit http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#14 HP-UX will not be ported to Alpha (no surprise)exit http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#18 HP-UX will not be ported to Alpha (no surprise)exit http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#14 Home mainframes http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#54 Newbie: Two quesions about mainframes http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003l.html#11 how long does (or did) it take to boot a timesharing system? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004.html#40 AMD/Linux vs Intel/Microsoft http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#46 Shipwrecks http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#75 [Lit.] Buffer overruns http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#9 intel's Vanderpool and virtualization in general (was Re: Cell press release, redacted.) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#7 54 Processors? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006q.html#26 garlic.com
From: BDH on 12 Nov 2006 19:24 Sans jet lag, con caffeine, your comment parses. If I may reconstitute: "I would not be surprised if claims like yours appeared in 'the literature' due to it being, in my opinion, inconsistent and of poor quality. I have seen many get confused about problem complexities due to the multiplicity of modes of measurement. Perhaps such happened to you." If you are confident what I have must be new if feasible, and I am confident it is feasible, I suppose you'd propose I compose prose to disclose those architectural flows I chose to those what knows how to oppose, decompose and dispose of what that prose may expose, such as the reviewers at some ACM journal.
From: Nick Maclaren on 13 Nov 2006 06:33 In article <1163377471.030500.10530(a)m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>, "BDH" <bhauth(a)gmail.com> writes: |> Sans jet lag, con caffeine, your comment parses. If I may reconstitute: |> |> "I would not be surprised if claims like yours appeared in 'the |> literature' due to it being, in my opinion, inconsistent and of poor |> quality. I have seen many get confused about problem complexities due |> to the multiplicity of modes of measurement. Perhaps such happened to |> you." Close, but not what I said. |> If you are confident what I have must be new if feasible, and I am |> confident it is feasible, I suppose you'd propose I compose prose to |> disclose those architectural flows I chose to those what knows how to |> oppose, decompose and dispose of what that prose may expose, such as |> the reviewers at some ACM journal. Yes. Regards, Nick Maclaren.
From: Eugene Miya on 13 Nov 2006 13:45 In article <45520857$1(a)darkstar>, I wrote: >>> Another set of people are looking at rethinking architecture and >>> languages this weekend. This session in my meeting did not pan out. Part of the problem was the bias of the LISP hardware oriented people. Insufficient hardware architects. But earlier in the weekend I had a great conversation with 2 guys who knew von Neumann when he was still alive. And 1 met Turing for a short time. >In article <1162948877.319024.167470(a)i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, >BDH <bhauth(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>What, in Dallas? >Dallas? No. > MIX/MMIX Never got discussed. But DEK has an interesting sounding collection of papers on games out next year. And he pushed his PL survey book (more historic survey than useful). --
From: Eugene Miya on 13 Nov 2006 15:43
In article <ej75qu$euc$1(a)gemini.csx.cam.ac.uk>, Nick Maclaren <nmm1(a)cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote: >This is getting boring. If you can provide evidence for the above claims, >please do so. Gee Nick, that's commonly asked of you, and you never seem to provide either. -- |