Article View: comp.arch
Article #3157Re: fad computing
From: Peter Desnoyers
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1989 19:10
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1989 19:10
38 lines
2593 bytes
2593 bytes
In article <1989Nov26.204924.24209@world.std.com> bzs@world.std.com (Barry
Shein) writes:
> What's being discussed are the *central* services that cross workgroup
> lines and, hence, are usually administered by a third-party entity
> who's only justification for existence is to manage the resources.
>
The biggest problems I have seen with central computing facilities have
been when one group (computer operations) looks good (i.e. comes in under
budget) at the expense of another group (whose schedule slips due to lack
of computing resources).
This is just one of many cases where the wrong rules cause inefficiency or
worse. It can happen anywhere, not just in computer operations. Office
space and layout is another area that is often handled by people with
objectives orthogonal to those of the actual engineers using the place.
Personally, I think that there will come a time when mainframe-type
computers will come into vogue again. Why? Because if you concentrate N
queues, each with server rate 1, onto a single queue with server rate N,
your expected wait goes down by a factor of N. Some of the main reasons
why workstations are currently popular are (IMHO):
(1) the current $/compute horsepower curve increases faster than O(N). If
your rate N server costs $N^2, then you are no better off than if you had
bought a bunch of workstations. Future technologies (e.g. parallelism) may
flatten this curve enough to give a decided advantage to large compute
servers.
(2) political reasons within organizations. Computer centers look out for
their own interests, rather than the groups they provide services for.
Budgets may be done in a way that hides the recurring costs of workstation
maintenance, while emphasising this cost for computer center use. Etc.,
etc. If these problems are worth fixing, rather than doing away with
altogether - well, that's what management consultants are for.
Peter Desnoyers
Apple ATG
(408) 974-4469
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<5417@internal.Apple.COM>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!apple.com!desnoyerReferences:
<89Nov25.051946est.2233@neat.cs.toronto.edu> <10446@encore.Encore.COM> <1989Nov26.204924.24209@world.std.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!apple.com!desnoyer From: desnoyer@apple.com (Peter Desnoyers) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: fad computing Message-ID: <5417@internal.Apple.COM> Date: 27 Nov 89 19:10:09 GMT Sender: usenet@Apple.COM Organization: Apple Computer, Inc. Lines: 38 References: <89Nov25.051946est.2233@neat.cs.toronto.edu> <10446@encore.Encore.COM> <1989Nov26.204924.24209@world.std.com>