From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 8 19:18:21 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 833E716A403 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 19:18:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from steve@Watt.COM) Received: from wattres.watt.com (wattres.watt.com [66.93.133.130]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F3EF13C494 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 19:18:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from steve@Watt.COM) Received: from wattres.watt.com (localhost.watt.com [127.0.0.1]) by wattres.watt.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l28In3LR041706; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 10:49:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from steve@wattres.watt.com) Received: (from steve@localhost) by wattres.watt.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id l28In32I041705; Thu, 8 Mar 2007 10:49:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from steve) Message-Id: <200703081849.l28In32I041705@wattres.watt.com> X-Newsgroups: local.freebsd-hackers In-Reply-To: From: steve@Watt.COM (Steve Watt) Organization: Watt Consultants, San Jose, CA, USA Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 10:49:03 -0800 X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.6 beta(5) 10/07/98) To: rudyrockstar@hotmail.com X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (wattres.watt.com [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 08 Mar 2007 10:49:08 -0800 (PST) X-Archived: 1173379748.162329194@wattres.Watt.COM Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: harddrive no memory ---FreeBSD scenario X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 19:18:21 -0000 In , Rudy wrote: > > A chip level loading of the core kernel would be the only way. > > So its not possible todo without a completly new hardware > infrastructre design. > > - I'm wanting todo this because computers are too slow. You need to learn a little more about the parts of a computer. Perhaps go to Google groups, and read comp.arch for a couple of months, making sure you understand all of the references. Disk drives are about 6 orders of magnitude (1,000,000x) slower than DDR memory. It takes a few tens of nanoseconds to read a random address from DDR, a few tens of milliseconds to read a random address from a disk. Note that DDR isn't the fastest memory in the system, either -- there are the L1 and L2 (and sometimes L3) caches as well. -- Steve Watt KD6GGD PP-ASEL-IA ICBM: 121W 56' 57.5" / 37N 20' 15.3" Internet: steve @ Watt.COM Whois: SW32-ARIN Free time? There's no such thing. It just comes in varying prices...