oyster@uwmacc.UUCP (Vicious Oyster) (08/02/85)
In article <2264@amdcad.UUCP> bcase@amdcad.UUCP (Brian case) writes: > >Following is an excerpt from an old Apple user's group newsletter > POTENTIAL PROBLEM > by Jerry W. Fewel > ...explains computer inertia... Of *course* it's serious. In fact, some super-computers have to be mounted on a special track, with springs, coils, etc., in order to bring the machine to a complete stop safely. Imagine, if you will, a computer mounted sorta like a recoiless howitzer and you'll get the idea. Conversely, some machines are so slow that you have to wait several minutes after running the last program to power them down in order to allow the last few instructions to catch up. Really! -- - joel "vo" plutchak {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!oyster "Take what I say in a different way and it's easy to say that this is all confusion."
tc@amd.UUCP (Tom Crawford) (08/05/85)
Another inertia related problem occurred on some of the older timesharing systems (SDS 940 comes to mind). Programs would have a tendency to keep running after they were swapped out to the disc. Sometimes it was really tough to figure out what the program counter really should be when they were swapped back in! Tom Crawford
smithson@calma.uucp (Brian Smithson) (08/07/85)
> In article <2264@amdcad.UUCP> bcase@amdcad.UUCP (Brian case) writes: > > > >Following is an excerpt from an old Apple user's group newsletter > > POTENTIAL PROBLEM > > by Jerry W. Fewel > > ...explains computer inertia... > > Of *course* it's serious. In fact, some super-computers have to be mounted > on a special track, with springs, coils, etc., in order to bring the machine > ... explanation of supercompters and slow computers ... This area of research brought to mind another potential problem. Let's say that NASA comes up with a spacecraft which can travel at or near the speed of light. Do its on-board computers get slower and slower as the magical velocity is approached? -- -Brian Smithson Calma Company ucbvax!calma!smithson calma!smithson@ucbvax.ARPA Graphitti seen on dispenser for disposable toilet seat covers: "Bibs for eating at [corporate headquarters] cafeteria"
brooks@lll-crg.ARPA (Eugene D. Brooks III) (08/08/85)
> > Another inertia related problem occurred on some of the older timesharing > systems (SDS 940 comes to mind). Programs would have a tendency to keep > running after they were swapped out to the disc. Sometimes it was really > tough to figure out what the program counter really should be when they > were swapped back in! > Tom Crawford Seriously now, the program counter was swapped out along with the memory image and the value to set it to was read back in with the memory image. That the program counter had changed along with the memory image was of no consequence. I do remember one poor fellow who had a job swapped out which had accumilated a lot of time and during this time the disk motor failed. When the motor was repaired it was wired backwards and the disk ran backwards This was done on a friday and the machine was left with the backward running disk over the weekend until the problem was finally corrected the following monday. When the disk was finally set straight the poor fellow has lost all of his accumilated cpu time and the job restarted from nearly the beginning.
peter@kitty.UUCP (Peter DaSilva) (08/09/85)
> This area of research brought to mind another potential problem. Let's say > that NASA comes up with a spacecraft which can travel at or near the speed of > light. Do its on-board computers get slower and slower as the magical velocity Reminds me of some of my weirder brainstorms, like a substance made of a crystal of charged black holes (charge opposed gravity). Won't work, of course, unless they're black-hole monopoles (:->). But boy talk about a rigid structure! Also you could dope it with bigger holes & make a hell of an optical computer... run real slo, though, because of the time dilation near the event horizons.
jnw@mcnc.UUCP (John White) (08/11/85)
> Reminds me of some of my weirder brainstorms, like a substance made of a > crystal of charged black holes (charge opposed gravity). Won't work, of > course, unless they're black-hole monopoles (:->). But boy talk about a rigid > structure! Also you could dope it with bigger holes & make a hell of an optical > computer... run real slo, though, because of the time dilation near the event > horizons. I once had an idea where a ferro-electric substance is used as the gate insulator of a dynamic ram (possibly over a very thin gate oxide). Then it won't have to be refreshed and it would be non-volital. Also, a slow, wafer size version could be made and used as a super-fast hard disk. (bad rows mapped out like bad sectors on a regular hard disk.) - John N. White <mcnc!jnw>
jeand@ihlpg.UUCP (AMBAR) (08/12/85)
> > Another inertia related problem occurred on some of the older timesharing > > systems (SDS 940 comes to mind). Programs would have a tendency to keep > > running after they were swapped out to the disc. Sometimes it was really > > tough to figure out what the program counter really should be when they > > were swapped back in! > > Tom Crawford > > Seriously now, the program counter was swapped out along with the memory > image and the value to set it to was read back in with the memory image. > That the program counter had changed along with the memory image was of > no consequence. I do remember one poor fellow who had a job swapped out > which had accumilated a lot of time and during this time the disk motor failed. > When the motor was repaired it was wired backwards and the disk ran backwards > This was done on a friday and the machine was left with the backward running > disk over the weekend until the problem was finally corrected the following > monday. When the disk was finally set straight the poor fellow has lost all > of his accumilated cpu time and the job restarted from nearly the beginning. This is nuttier than most of the stuff on net.bizarre. I'm envious! AMBAR {*ANYTHING*}!ihnp4!ihlpg!jeand "I told you when I *MET* you that I was crazy, and you weren't listening!"