Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!att!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!apple!sun-barr!newstop!east!tjp!jpainter
From: jpainter@tjp.East.Sun.COM (John Painter - Sun BOS Hardware)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.transputer
Subject: Re: Very parallel systems.
Message-ID: <686@east.East.Sun.COM>
Date: 10 Aug 89 00:00:08 GMT
References: <$TFBCFDTJCGNF.at.UMPA>
Sender: news@east.East.Sun.COM
Reply-To: jpainter@tjp.East.Sun.COM (John Painter - Sun BOS Hardware)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Billerica MA
Lines: 25

In article <$TFBCFDTJCGNF.at.UMPA> XUUM32@prime-a.central-services.umist.ac.uk ("Mr. Andy Packham") writes:
>I've got some applications I would'nt mind trying out on a
>transputer system. However, by their nature they are massively
>parellel. Does anybody know of any boards for the PC or like that
>could handle perhaps 100's of tasks, each task in its selt is
>probably very simple so the processing power of each individual unit
>can be low; ie something like a Z80 (retrograde development !) rather
>than a T-whatever which would be overkill and too expensive !
>Thanks for your help,

Why not run several (8-16) transputers each running several tasks.
The channel communication is the same as 1 task on each processor
(with minor, hopefully hidden by your development system, differences
that are easy to overcome if they aren't) 


/Tjp

-disclaimers ... we don't need no stinking disclaimers





-Enough whitespace mr. mailer ????