lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call
    Mark Hahn wrote:
    >>OK, so now you've slid from talking about PCs to 2-way to 4-way ...
    >>perhaps because your original arguement was fatally flawed.
    >
    >
    > oh, come on. the issue is whether memory is fast and flat.
    > most "scalability" efforts are mainly trying to code around the fact
    > that any ccNUMA (and most 4-ways) is going to be slow/bumpy.
    > it is reasonable to worry that optimizations for imbalanced machines
    > will hurt "normal" ones. is it worth hurting uni by 5% to give
    > a 50% speedup to IBM's 32-way? I think not, simply because
    > low-end machines are more important to Linux.
    >
    > the best way to kill Linux is to turn it into an OS best suited
    > for $6+-digit machines.

    Linux has a key feature that most other OS's lack: It can (easily, and by all)
    be recompiled for a particular architecture. So, there is no particular reason why
    optimizing for a high-end system has to kill performance on uni-processor
    machines.

    For instance, don't locks simply get compiled away to nothing on
    uni-processor machines?

    --
    Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear AT excite.com>
    President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
    ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear


    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.028 / U:59.824 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site