🚀 go-pugleaf

We won't have any processor bound applications that we know of.  We 
currently can't get IB to run well as a server on a dual-core system 
anyway.  The last time I saw the term SMP, about 12 years ago, it was 
used for symmetric multiprocessor.  Is this still what it references?

If so, I am missing the distinction between dual core and SMP since it 
used to be that dual core was just a special case of multiple processors 
accessing the same memory.  We have had SMP around since the early 
1960's, the only difference being today we can cram multiple processors 
on a single chip as opposed to on a single board or in a single backplane.

The systems we have will all be single user, with the processors 
(hopefully not the operating system) determining how many processors 
need to be invoked and when.  So, hopefully, we would only have to 
license each system.  However, we don't want to have to relicense them 
each year as upgrades come out.

What I don't understand is how Intel/AMD can build a PC board that has 
more processors, but runs an application 20 to 30 times slower than a 
single processor board.  Multiprocessors used to have a counter that 
detected instruction aborts and if a threshold was exceeded, that thread 
quit being multiprocessed.  Oh, well... Microsoft has never written a 
decent scheduler for Windows products, why should Intel have to learn 
how to correctly build processors....

Thanks for your reponses.