Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!uccba!uceng!rsexton
From: rsexton@uceng.UC.EDU (robert sexton)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Transputer based systems.
Keywords: transputer, inmos, unix
Message-ID: <253@uceng.UC.EDU>
Date: 20 Sep 88 15:37:32 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Univ. of Cincinnati, College of Engg.
Lines: 22

being a fan of parallel system and their advantages, I was wondering why
the transputer has not gotten off the ground as a viable system.  It seems
pretty feasable, as well as very cost-effective.  I imagine a machine with
several transputers, each running unix.  When the machine is lightly loaded,
every user gets a processor, maybe more, when its heavily loaded, the users 
have to share processors.  Admittedly, there are obstacles in the areas
of shared memory, shared storage, and general parallelization.  The first
two are pretty simple to defeat, but the third seems to show no signs of
going away.  It seems however, that by mapping tasks onto processors, we
could get a pretty flexible system right now.  When you run out of power,
you can just add more processors.  A system with 64 transputers could
could theoretically provide 16 times the floating point performance
of a VAX 8650, for approximately $64000.  Admittedly these ponderings
are largely wishful thinking, but the price/performance could be incredible.
natural applications would be ray tracing, fluid flow, etc.
Thanks in advance for your input.


Robert Sexton, University of Cincinnati
rsexton@uceng.uc.edu tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!uccba!uceng!rsexton
Box Full O' Transputers... The Breakfast with MIPS
I do not speak for UC, They don't speak for me.