Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 17:36:25 -0700 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: dscheidt@enteract.com, ragnar@sysabend.org, tlambert@primenet.com, noslenj@swbell.net, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: dual 400 -> dual 600 worth it? Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.19991215173331.046e1aa0@localhost> In-Reply-To: <199912160007.RAA25886@usr09.primenet.com> References: <4.2.0.58.19991215010917.048dfae0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 05:07 PM 12/15/1999 , Terry Lambert wrote: > > >The glue needed to build an N-way > > >machine will always be less expensive than N uniprocessor boxes. > > > > Not so. The special chip sets are usually priced at a premium. > >I think this is because they work, and allow things like more >than 2 PCI bus masters at a time, compared to many chipsets, >whose arbitration logic fails over 2 PCI masters. That's correct. Most of these chipsets are produced in relatively small volumes by server manufacturers, who must devote a lot of time, effort, equipment, and staff to R&D. One pays a premium for that! The most cost-effective solution, when one needs more computing resources than fit cheaply into one box, is to find ways to distribute the problem cleanly among MANY boxes. SMP is, most of the time, either a last resort or a way to throw money at the problem rather than finessing it. --Brett Glass To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.2.0.58.19991215173331.046e1aa0>