🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Bz5s9F.J32.2@cs.cmu.edu> lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay) writes:
 > Oddly, although Crays have been multiprocessors for years, a lot of
 > programs only use one Cray processor. This is often largely a
 > function of incentive. One installation offered a big budget break to
 > parallel applications, and sure enough, almost everything suddenly
 > turned out to be parallelizable.

I do not think it is very odd.  If there is no incentive by budget breaks
or things like that, a program which has been parallelized will cost you
more than a program not parallelized.  The program takes more raw CPU time,
although it is done faster.

This is always a problem in places where budgets are used.  I know of
programs for the Cyber 205 that vectorized extremely well but should be
run scalar.  The reason was that the vectorized version required more
memory and you had to pay for that, so much more that it completely
eliminated the advantage of the faster result in CPU time.
-- 
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj  amsterdam, nederland
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn  amsterdam, nederland; e-mail: dik@cwi.nl