Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mfci!yale!wallman-george From: wallman-george@CS.YALE.EDU (Natuerlich!) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: transputer Message-ID: <28623@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> Date: 6 May 88 20:24:26 GMT References: <28201@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> <4679@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> Sender: root@yale.UUCP Reply-To: wallman-george@CS.YALE.EDU (Natuerlich!) Organization: Natuerlich!'s Software Vault #5 -- Location Yale Lines: 32 Keywords: process communication parallel Yeah! In article <4679@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> braner@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (braner) writes: >[Lots of interesting stuff about the transputer] > Thanks for some information about the transputer, I would be most happy if the following points could be cleared up too. Well if there is an OS, will there be a copy for every processor, will it be in shared (slooow) memory or will there be a processor running os code exclusively passing results to the other transputers. (all of the above methods sound not tooo great to say the least). Same for shared resources like graphics, I/O and stuff. How ? I had actually expected that the system would run more like this, A table with processes that are to be run. Lots of processors ( say 4 in the beginning, (- stolen from M.B.-)) grabbing processes that need to be run, swapping in the process space from disk (*) and executing those merrily. If we have 1MB per processor, we don't -quite- have Virtual Memory, but something inbetween, and it sounds quite Unix-like. Arguably it might not be the perfect thing to do for the transputer, neg- lecting maybe some hardware niceties. Natuerlich! (*) poor overworked HD -------------------------------------------------------------- Loveletters & Hatemail to : wallman@yalecs Files to : WALLMANN@CTSTATEU (Bitnet) Talk to : wallman@yale-zoo-suned.arpa --------------------------------------------------------------