Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 15 May 1997 18:07:21 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Ben Black <black@zen.cypher.net>
To:        "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>
Cc:        Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@americantv.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Cluster Computing in BSD
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.3.91.970515180626.10796C-100000@zen.cypher.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.A41.3.95.970515161320.38526A-100000@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
the SP2 is probably a bad example.  MCI here just replaced theirs with a 
pair of Ultra Enterprise 6000s and performance is great.  the moral is: 
one parallel computer does not benchmark for them all.


b3n

On Thu, 15 May 1997, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote:

> On Thu, 15 May 1997, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
> 
> > On May 05, 1997 at 01:55:53PM -0700, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote:
> > > Parallel computing is not cost effective,
> > 
> > Hmm.  Show references please.  You might want to check out a paper that
> > discusses this issue:
> > 
> It's my personal conclusion with the systems we have on campus. We have an
> SP2, with 4 processors (which in theory is the best price/performance you
> can get) and the guys that handle it report it isn't fast and that they
> need more resources for it.
> I must admit that even with all the courses they have received from IBM
> they have showed to be very incompetent in different areas, but with all
> those IBM engineers coming in and out (my campus is very important in a
> national level) for about two years now, I would expect more results.
> Maybe parallel computing is cost effective but I haven't noticed it :(.
> 
> >     D.Wood and M.Hill, "Cost-Effective Parallel Computing",
> >         IEEE Computer, Feb 1995
> >
> Thanks for the reference...I'll look for it.
> 
> 	Pedro.
> 
> > --
> > Jonathan
> > 
> 



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.3.91.970515180626.10796C-100000>