|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Le 2011-06-09 23:27, Darren New a écrit :
> On 6/9/2011 18:34, Francois Labreque wrote:
>> There's also the question of performance. One needs a metric ton of
>> bladeservers to be able to match the performance under load of a 20
>> year old
>> mainframe sysplex.
>
> The main difference between mainframes and smaller systems is that
> mainframes are optimized for I/O. Even the mainframe I used 30 years ago
> could do several I/O operations simultaneously faster than the CPU could
> handle it. For example, you could be swapping in/out three processes, as
> well as accessing the data and an index page of a database, while the
> CPU is running full speed. There were four IOPs for each CPU, and each
> IOP could handle two DMA channels.
Yep, or having separate front-end processors dealing with keeping the
user sessions alive, etc. Leaving the CPUs deal with important stuff.
>
> Sort of like how video cards nowadays do all kinds of processing without
> the CPU's involvement other than setting them up.
>
Or some high-end server network cards implement the basic functionality
of the IP stack, or SSL encryption in hardware.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |