Article View: comp.arch
Article #2840Re: Shared Memory vs. Distributed Systems
From: David Boreham
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1989 08:55
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1989 08:55
50 lines
3229 bytes
3229 bytes
In article <20764@usc.edu> vorbrueg@bufo.usc.edu (Jan Vorbrueggen) writes (in
response to article <36597@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> brooks@maddog.llnl.gov (Eugene Brooks):
>Eugene, ever seen a transputer? Overhead for receiving or sending a
>message is 19 cycles (630 ns for a 30 MHz part). The actual transfer
>is done by a dedicated DMA machine at a maximum rate of 1.7 Mbyte/s
and then in <1646@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM> pasek@c10sd3.StPaul.NCR.COM (M. A. Pasek)
says some things which I don't really understand.
Anyway, here is what a transputer link actually IS:
------------
! !
---------- ! DMA ! ------------
! Memory ! ! Engine ! ! !
! on CPU A !=======! !=======! Serializer !--------
! ! ! ! ! ! !
---------- ! ! ------------ !
! ! !
! ! !
------------ ! Serial
! Link
!
---------------------------------------------------------------- !
!
------------ !
! ! !
---------- ! DMA ! ------------ !
! Memory ! ! Engine ! ! ! !
! on CPU B !=======! !=======! Serializer !--------
! ! ! ! ! !
---------- ! ! ------------
! !
! !
------------
Everything above the dotted line is on transputer A, everything below the line
in on transputer B. Of course there is also a CPU which fights for local memory
on a cycle-by-cycle basis. Each transputer has N copies of the link circuitry
(including 2N DMA engines). Currently 2 <= N <= 4 and the serial link goes at
20Mbits.
David Boreham, INMOS Limited | mail(uk): davidb@inmos.co.uk or ukc!inmos!davidb
Bristol, England | (us): uunet!inmos-c!davidb
+44 454 616616 ex 543 | Internet : @col.hp.com:davidb@inmos-c
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<2673@ganymede.inmos.co.uk>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!mcsun!ukc!inmos!davidbShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!mcsun!ukc!inmos!davidb From: davidb@titan.inmos.co.uk (David Boreham) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Shared Memory vs. Distributed Systems Message-ID: <2673@ganymede.inmos.co.uk> Date: 26 Oct 89 08:55:51 GMT Sender: news@inmos.co.uk Reply-To: davidb@inmos.co.uk () Organization: INMOS Limited, Bristol, UK. Lines: 50