Re: Re: Re: MISC-d Digest V98 #28
- To: clippitt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Re: Re: MISC-d Digest V98 #28
- From: dcr@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Dan C. Rinnert)
- Date: 17 Jul 1998 20:18:51 GMT
- Cc: garyl@xxxxxxxxxxx, MISC
- Organization: Canville Virtual Village
- Reply-To: dcr@xxxxxxxxxxxx
clippitt@cs5.dasd.honeywell.com,World writes:
>You mean *easier* than adding/removing RAM. I still think it wise to turn
>power off before I modify the physical RAM :), however, I'd like to
add/remove
>processing nodes w/o that bother.
I'd like to see hot-swappable RAM and processor nodes.
>The idea of having special processing nodes to
>handle specific IO tasks for the OS (such as a hard-drive interface) reminds
>me of the Transputer systems that even went so far as to have specific
variants
>of the node hardware built for these specific tasks. Do you want to go that
>far?
Perhaps at some point, but not in the beginning. But, I would still want in
specific variants to be able to perform general tasks, and vice versa. That
way, should a specific processor "go South", tasks could be moved to other
processors to keep the machine running. A general processor may not perform
a given task as optimally as one designed specifically for that given task,
but it should be able to assume those tasks until the down processor is fixed
or replaced. The computer should also be able to reset a hung processor
without a full restart.
But, of course, there will always be those exceptions where a general
processor simply cannot perform a particular task for which a given processor
has been designed. In those cases, if the processor was down, those tasks
could not be completed until it was fixed or replaced.
And, with networking, the computer should be able to delegate functions
locally and also to other processors available on the network. If two people
on a network each have a machine with ten processors, and one computer is
running all ten and being pushed to the limits, and the other is using only
half of its processors, the first computer should be able to make use of
those other five processors over the network. Of course, you'd need to have
a security feature built-in that would allow a user to disallow other network
machines from using its spare processors, or prompt for permission.
Dan