Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:37:13 -0500 From: "Aryeh M. Friedman" <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com> To: Brian <bri@brianwhalen.net> Cc: Bruce Cran <bruce@cran.org.uk>, Pieter de Goeje <pieter@degoeje.nl>, Andy Greenwood <greenwood.andy@gmail.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Upper limit on make -j ? Message-ID: <474CE269.4000608@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20071127161036.L1233@numail.brianwhalen.net> References: <bef9a7920711270025k73cfd90i4d3abe3c6eab6160@mail.gmail.com> <474C3A12.9040107@gmail.com> <200711271657.00637.pieter@degoeje.nl> <474CA4E7.9060401@cran.org.uk> <20071127161036.L1233@numail.brianwhalen.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Brian wrote: > Isn't 1000 an unrealistically high value? > For the next few years maybe but with core counts going up I can easily see a 512 or 1024 core machine by say 2015.. i.e. Moore's law may not apply to single tasking chips any mores but it seems to be in full force for multi-core ones... this brings me to why I tried it in the first place I was exploring weither or not FreeBSD was ready for this kind of core count (specifically the idea of a multitasking OS scheduling by allocating one process per core for core counts greater then say 64)... I am in the process of considering the design requirements for a OS I plan to do from the ground up and like to know the limits of current ones. - -- Aryeh M. Friedman Developer, not business, friendly http://www.flosoft-systems.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHTOJpJ9+1V27SttsRAhMCAJ902zwVIxCGecI2cAdIm2bywN383ACfU243 HMUWkzcO8hH87PecYBmkgLc= =5614 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?474CE269.4000608>