johndonsp

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by johndonsp 14y ago

   You text and drive at the same time? Isn't that illegal in most countries and states?
2. 2.▲
   by johndonsp 14y ago

   I completely agree with you about fault-tolerance. However Erlang, CSP, actors and message passing are heralded as the key to parallelism. The Erlang book still promises n-times speedup for n-cores, with not enough of a caveat.
3. 3.▲
   by johndonsp 14y ago

   That's the limitation of Erlang, right there. They get in line, creating a bottleneck. You could have 10,000 Erlang processes, but they all wait in line for this one process to service them. If you use transactional memory with threads and
4. 4.▲
   by johndonsp 14y ago

   No, the parallelism in that algorithm is fundamentally limited. That bottleneck is not going away, and was an example of where neither Erlang nor any other model of parallelism will help you. Do you have any good ideas about how I can solve
5. 5.▲
   by johndonsp 14y ago

   I wonder if those apps run n-times faster on n-cores. I think probably not, due to inherent limitations in the parallelism available in them, but perhaps I should do a study to verify that. Erlang claiming n-times faster on n-cores is snake
6. 6.▲
   by johndonsp 14y ago

   Message passing is fantastic... when you can decompose your problem into lots of small, independent jobs, like a web server. However not many algorithms are like that. If you can't decompose your problem into small independent jobs then you