coco@cbnewsl.att.com (felix.a.lugo) (02/20/91)
Has anybody been able to get a NeXT cube working with both the 030 and 040 boards simultaneously? If so, how and what type of configuration? (Note: this is ONE cube with TWO boards installed.) Is it possible? What mods. have to be made to get them working? /* ** ============================================================================ ** ** Felix A. Lugo AT&T Bell Laboratories ** ** E-Mail: ** (708) 713-4374 coco@ihlpb.att.com att!ihlpb!coco ** ** NeXT-Mail: ** (708) 515-0668 coco@alien.att.com alien.att.com!bootsie!coco ** ** ============================================================================ */
eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) (02/22/91)
In article <1991Feb19.185400.7763@cbnewsl.att.com> coco@cbnewsl.att.com (felix.a.lugo) writes: > Has anybody been able to get a NeXT cube working with both the 030 and > 040 boards simultaneously? Type hostinfo If it says "Kernel configured for a single processor only." then the multiprocessing support just isn't in there. This is the case for the 2.0 Release. -=EPS=-
coco@cbnewsl.att.com (felix.a.lugo) (02/22/91)
In article <1338@toaster.SFSU.EDU> eps@cs.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) writes: | In article <1991Feb19.185400.7763@cbnewsl.att.com> | coco@cbnewsl.att.com (felix.a.lugo) writes: | > Has anybody been able to get a NeXT cube working with both the 030 and | > 040 boards simultaneously? | | Type | hostinfo | | If it says "Kernel configured for a single processor only." then | the multiprocessing support just isn't in there. This is the | case for the 2.0 Release. | | -=EPS=- You misunderstood! I never mentioned having multiprocessor support through Mach, I just asked if anyone had been able to get the two boards up and running on a single NeXT cube (each board running independently!) If this can be done, you can network the two boards through the 10base2 connectors and designate a server and a client. The client could be configured, for example, as the print server for the NeXT laser-printer, freeing-up the server processor. You would indeed have "distributed multiprocessing". Think of a 3D-animation application; the server might be busy displaying a complicated 3D animation, while the client is hurriedly calculating the NeXT frame(s) in the animation sequence. So, again I ask, has anyone done this? NeXT tech., is this possible? /* ** ============================================================================ ** ** Felix A. Lugo AT&T Bell Laboratories ** ** E-Mail: ** (708) 713-4374 coco@ihlpb.att.com att!ihlpb!coco ** ** NeXT-Mail: ** (708) 515-0668 coco@alien.att.com alien.att.com!bootsie!coco ** ** ============================================================================ */
lacsap@plethora.media.mit.edu (Pascal Chesnais) (02/23/91)
In article <1991Feb22.034020.24127@cbnewsl.att.com> coco@cbnewsl.att.com (felix.a.lugo) writes: > In article <1338@toaster.SFSU.EDU> eps@cs.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) writes: > | In article <1991Feb19.185400.7763@cbnewsl.att.com> > | coco@cbnewsl.att.com (felix.a.lugo) writes: > | > Has anybody been able to get a NeXT cube working with both the 030 and > | > 040 boards simultaneously? Without hardware modification, the answer of running two boards in one cube regardless of mach support is - NO. The 030 and 040 board both expect to live in slot 0 of the NeXTbus. Further there are a number of other signals they wish to deal with on the bus. You can not run both boards with display heads, due to the power supply limitations. If you do the necessary work (and I don't know what exactly it is) you should be able to isolate the 030 completely from the bus apart from power. Next problem is software, you will need to load it from somewhere, and I suspect that would be from the 040 via the enet. Problem here is that unless you put significant memory in the 030 board there is the chance that you will swap over the enet and lose the performance you were hoping to gain. Bottom line is you are going to have a bastardized system which will void the 030 warantee:-) and probably have questionable performance increase... best put more 4MB SIMMS... Pascal Chesnais, Research Specialist, Electronic Publishing Group Media Laboratory, E15-351, 20 Ames Street, Cambridge, Ma, 02139 (617) 253-0311 email: lacsap@plethora.media.mit.edu (NeXT)
cs191057@cs.brown.edu (Heng-Yi Lin) (02/23/91)
In article <22FEB91101602@uazhe0.physics.arizona.edu>, zazula@uazhe0.physics.arizona.edu (RALPH ZAZULA) writes: |> How about an '030 & an '040 in the same cube, running as 2 different |> nodes, connected via ethernet? Say the '030 just gets power from |> the bacplane (probably have to disable some connectors) and looks |> like a diskless workstation/batch node... I'd like to do this when |> I upgrade my '030 cube to an '040. I am confused, people. Why all this talk about having two boards inside the cube? I thought you are supposed to return the 030 board once the new board is installed. For this purpose NeXT has included a freight-collect Fedex label. Am I missing something? -- __Heng-Yi Lin___________________________________ Brown University Class of 1992 CompSci/Economics cs191057@cs.brown.edu st702478@brownvm.brown.edu POB 4901, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912
zazula@uazhe0.physics.arizona.edu (RALPH ZAZULA) (02/23/91)
In article <1338@toaster.SFSU.EDU>, eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) writes... >In article <1991Feb19.185400.7763@cbnewsl.att.com> > coco@cbnewsl.att.com (felix.a.lugo) writes: >> Has anybody been able to get a NeXT cube working with both the 030 and >> 040 boards simultaneously? > >Type > hostinfo > >If it says "Kernel configured for a single processor only." then >the multiprocessing support just isn't in there. This is the >case for the 2.0 Release. > > -=EPS=- How about an '030 & an '040 in the same cube, running as 2 different nodes, connected via ethernet? Say the '030 just gets power from the bacplane (probably have to disable some connectors) and looks like a diskless workstation/batch node... I'd like to do this when I upgrade my '030 cube to an '040. Ralph |----------------------------------------------------------------------| | Ralph Zazula "Computer Addict!" | | University of Arizona --- Department of Physics | | UAZHEP::ZAZULA (DecNet/HEPNet) | | zazula@uazhe0.physics.arizona.edu (Internet) | |----------------------------------------------------------------------| | "You can twist perceptions, reality won't budge." - Neil Peart | |----------------------------------------------------------------------|
pfkeb@ebnextk.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Paul Kunz) (02/23/91)
Too bad if we can't keep the '030 board and run it inside the same Cube. What I would do with it is to let it run my printer. Then, when someone does complex graphics printing on my machine, I wouldn't be so slowed down. Even with the 2.0 I have, which lowered the priority of the printing processes, I still suffer when someone on my network prints to my machine. P.S. This is not my idea. Someone suggested it to me today, I forget who.
cafe@cbnewse.att.com (richard.dib) (02/23/91)
In article <1338@toaster.SFSU.EDU>, eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) writes: > In article <1991Feb19.185400.7763@cbnewsl.att.com> > > > Has anybody been able to get a NeXT cube working with both the 030 and > > 040 boards simultaneously? > > Type > hostinfo > > If it says "Kernel configured for a single processor only." then > the multiprocessing support just isn't in there. This is the > case for the 2.0 Release. > > -=EPS=- I think that what he means is to have like TWO machines in inside ONE cube. The 030 board can then be connected by "network" to the 040 board. Since the 030 board lacks the ability to use the bus (The missing CHIP ...) Then there will be no BUS confilcts. The 030 board can then have a SCSI drive attached. This is NOT the same as having a machine with multiple processors and that use the same bus, etc. This is like having TWO cubes connected by a ethernet cable (in this case the two cubes share the same casing). The main problem is to boot up both boards when you press the power key and then to be able to shut them down. There should be a way of doing it. The power supply should handle both boards (maybe not two monitors ...). Any sugestions? Richard Dib AT&T Bell Laboratories
scott@erick.gac.edu (Scott Hess) (02/23/91)
In article <PFKEB.91Feb22211453@ebnextk.SLAC.Stanford.EDU> pfkeb@ebnextk.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Paul Kunz) writes:
Too bad if we can't keep the '030 board and run it inside the same Cube.
What I would do with it is to let it run my printer. Then, when
someone does complex graphics printing on my machine, I wouldn't be
so slowed down. Even with the 2.0 I have, which lowered the priority
of the printing processes, I still suffer when someone on my network
prints to my machine.
This is all a great idea (keeping the '030 along with the '040), and there's
no really uncircumventable reason not to. You can conceivably do it.
The main problem with many of the things mentioned on this newsgroup
(running it as a print server, compute server, whatnot) is that you
aren't licensed to run NextStep 2.0 on both machines. I suppose
you could get a new license, but even then, I'm not sure how that
would work (are you licensed to run it on the machine, or on
the CPUs, or what - I assume that the CPU is the level at which
you license it).
Of course, we _could_ port Reno . . .
Later,
--
scott hess scott@gac.edu
Independent NeXT Developer GAC Undergrad
<I still speak for nobody>
"Tried anarchy, once. Found it had too many constraints . . ."
"Buy `Sweat 'n wit '2 Live Crew'`, a new weight loss program by
Richard Simmons . . ."