4 ms·
> there are many places that have big clusters of multi-processor machines, and none of their code is threaded. A bit over-general, don't you think? There are
by notacoward 9y ago
> there are many places that have big clusters of multi-processor machines, and none of their code is threaded.
A bit over-general, don't you think? There are many places that have big clusters full of single-threaded processes. There are also many places that have big clusters full of multi-threaded processes. I don't know which group is the biggest, but it doesn't matter as far as Osterhout's argument is concerned. What matters is that, contrary to the context in which that argument is framed, wringing performance out of multiple CPUs in a single system is an almost universal need nowadays. Many of them furthermore need high levels of intra-process as well as inter-process parallelism for that purpose. Threading is not the only way to achieve that, but he never even considers other alternatives. No matter what hairs are split or who tries to claim the biggest credentials, the OP remains seriously time-bound and its applicability to modern systems is weak.