buz@cs.nps.navy.mil (09/08/89)
The following are a brief synopsis of the machines that I received comments about. The comments ranged from detailed testamonials to breif mentions. The relevant context from my original posting is included immediately below. ==================== excerpt from original posting ==================== ...I would like to augment this very reasonable computing base with a parallel processor to: (1) handle general CPU and disk intensive computing needs (i.e., provide an efficiently managed pool of CPU cycle and disk resources) (2) allow us to credibly teach parallel algorithms, architecture and parallel/distributed O.S. courses with realistic projects (3) allow research experimentation with parallel algorithms, simulations, operating systems, etc. (both running on the native O.S. and via simulations of "virtual" parallel machines that we can build on top of the native O.S.). (4) handle critical departmental computing needs in a reliable fashion (hopefully, without comflicting with (3) too much). As a minimum the machine needs to: (1) provide excellent price/performance (2) have a good reliability and service reputation (3) run an "almost perfectly real" version of 4.3BSD Unix (i.e. it must be an easy port target -- Mach would also be an interesting option) (4) run tcp/ip, NFS, X11R3, tex/latex, lisp, ada, and other common academic software =========================== end of excerpt ============================ Small scale multiprocessors (up to 8): MIPS Co. MIPS R3000 based multiprocessor server, good comments about compiler and NFS Solbourne Sparc based multiprocessor server, Sun binary compatible Pyramid CISC (not sure which) based multiprocessor, 4.3BSD SGI MIPS R2000 Sys V based Ardent MIPS based multiprocessor Stellar Proprietary multi-CPU design Apollo DN/DPS10000 68020 binary compatible (good recommendations on O.S. software, even) The general consensus (with an exception or two) is that the machines in this group reflect individually better (in price/performance terms) CPU designs than those in the following group (i.e., many people like the MIPS/Sparc/DN10000 CPU architectures) Medium scale (8-32): Sequent 80386 and 32032 versions, run Dynix (a reportedly good 4.3BSD sys V merge), mostly good comments, several very satified customers, some thought SW was poor, wide software base Encore good comments, Mach is available, wide academic/research software base Alliant 68020 instr set, Can do loop parallelism, good number cruncher, probably not as good for supporting lots (100s) of users as Sequent or Encore, unsure of "general purpose" software base Elxsi Few comments, good number crunching capability (good optimizing Fortran compiler), unsure of "general purpose" software base (CPU number-wise this probably should have been in the preceeding group, but price-wise it fits better here) Convex Few comments, good number crunching capability (good optimizing Fortran compiler), unsure of "general purpose" software base In this group the (apparent) consensus was to check out both Sequent and Encore for large-scale (i.e. supporting many users) general purpose computing needs, and to check out Alliant, Convex and Elxsi for fast number crunching capabilities. Unconventional architecture: Multiflow Trace VLIW machine, brief mention, easy to port target for common math packages, good speedups on fine grain parallel programs. No comments on the suitability for general purpose computing. Large scale multiprocessors (10s to 100s): AT&T pixel machine 60 DSP style processors (didn't get many details) BBN Butterfly Good FP and/or Vector unit, new machine has much improved I/O and is M88000 based, older ones are 68020 (system can be grown to large/expensive size), Mach'ish operating system. Parting Comments: We ended up using our money to upgrade existing equipment and to buy new software. Thus, our purchase of new hardware will be delayed slightly. Based upon the input that I got (some machines I didn't get many details on) the "good bet" awards go to SGI (for out-and-out MIPS/$ look at the 8 processor R3000 server) and BBN (for putting a LOT of general purpose processors in a reasonably priced, expandable, package). These are the two (diverse) machines that I thought offered the best deal for the type of needs that we currently have. Disclaimer: All of the usual disclaimers apply. I make no guarantees for the thoroughness or completeness of information. This summary reflects my opinions (based on net-land and vendor input) of the machines that I considered for our specific needs -- it does not reflect the opinions of my employer, God, Elvis (whereever he may be) or anybody else. Thanks: To all who supplied information. Greg Buzzard (prof.) internet: buz@cs.nps.navy.mil CS Department (mail code 52Bu) Naval Postgraduate School phone: 408/646-2693 Monterey, CA 93943
eugene@eos.UUCP (Eugene Miya) (09/08/89)
Very interesting. No one recommended or even mentioned the FLEX/32, and I know of at least 3 sites (none net accessible). Another gross generalization from --eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@aurora.arc.nasa.gov resident cynic at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers: "You trust the `reply' command with all those different mailers out there?" "If my mail does not reach you, please accept my apology." {ncar,decwrl,hplabs,uunet}!ames!eugene Live free or die.
dennism@menace.rtech.COM (Dennis Moore (x2435, 1080-276) INGRES/teamwork) (09/09/89)
Another un-mentioned multiprocessor: A *great* price/performance machine is the system from Corollary (and SCO, I think). It's a symmetric multiprocessor running Xenix or Unix V. I think you can run any MS-DOS or 386 Unix software on it. -- Dennis Moore, my own opinions etc etc etc