Re: Cache coherency, clustering, and Kernel virtualization

["Thomas E. Spanjaard" <tgen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bill Hacker wrote:
> Thomas E. Spanjaard wrote:
> > This is hardly the logical step forward beyond SMP, and does nothing 
> > to make proper use of consumer-level NUMA equipment (AMDs 
> > Athlon64/Opteron family of processors for example), I don't see 
> > multiple virtual kernels work in a NUMA system. Or do you intend to 
> > not neglect this class of machines? :)
> Let us not forget that what Matt has proposed to do is not the 
> be-all-and end-all of DFLY. Wasn't really even the core part of the 
> 'Prime Directive'.

Good, I feared otherwise ;).

> NUMA, and the AMD instructions set, as well as Intel's sudden rush of 
> brains to the anatomy with Vanderpool, are not yet where IBM's 
> mainframe-class CPU have been for a very long time.  I'm not talking 
> about speed or cost, or even elegance of the instructions set or 
> pipeline - or any of that.

IBM's mainframes didn't really cater for the same market as, say, SGI's 
MPP machines. The latter is what I like, you like something else 
(better)(as you say further on :)).

> JM2CW

Just My 2 Cents... Worth?

> but Virtualization and hypervisor capability are of far more 
> utility to me, here and now, than clustering is likely to be ... ever.

The opposite holds for me :).

Cheers,
--
        Thomas E. Spanjaard
        tgen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature