Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 4 Mar 2000 19:54:40 -0500 (EST) | From | "Richard B. Johnson" <> | Subject | Re: Help in DSM design |
| |
On Fri, 3 Mar 2000, Ronald G. Minnich wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Mar 2000, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > > On Sat, 4 Mar 2000, Richard Gooch wrote: > > > > > > > > Ach! Not another DSM project :-( Don't do it. There's already a DSM > > > > [dsm horror story] > > I swore I would avoid this argument but ... > > look, there's DSMs and there's DSMs. And there's different types of > applications. I've done a fair number of parallel apps and there are cases > where you can use DSM, and cases where you can't and you use message > passing. I can point to failures with both models. > > You want to see failures with DSM, you'll find 'em, because people do > stupid things with them. That doesn't automatically condemn the > technology, it just means it's not universal (what is?). > > You want to see a few successes, well, look at my web page and check the > papers. >
Don't get all bent out of shape. The point is that if you don't need DSM (i.e., Customer requirement), it's not a very good idea to use it.
There are many "papers", mostly written by those who "finally got something to work...", that will show the greatness of practically anything. Reference: "Stockholm Syndrome".
Cheers, Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.3.41 on an i686 machine (800.63 BogoMips).
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |