🚀 go-pugleaf

hase@netmbx.UUCP (Hartmut Semken) writes:
>In article <28623@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> wallman-george@CS.YALE.EDU (Natuerlich!) writes:
>>Well if there is an OS, will there be a copy for every processor, will it
>>be in shared (slooow) memory or will there be a processor running os code
>No. I wonder if there is some literature about the T's there in USA; we
>have the c't, a magazine writng a lot about them.
>T's are different. All resources are completely local (memory, I/O ..)
>and the T communicates over a serials line (with "DMA" and 5/10/20
>Megabit per second). All shared devices (hard disk) are local to one
>transputer (call it a "server" or whatever you like).
>>exclusively passing results to the other transputers. (all of the above
>>methods sound not tooo great to say the least).
>Thats it! Think object-oriented: procedures for an objekt are residing
>in the transputer, messages between the objects are passed through the
>links. The T's have no support for virtual memory; I do'nt know who
>needs it. My OS/9 or RTOS systems have no VM and I like them for not
>wasting processor time in system-code...
>>Same for shared resources like graphics, I/O and stuff. How ?
>Like above. Nothing is "shared", everything is local (!).
>
>out of time
>hase
>-- 
>Hartmut Semken, Lupsteiner Weg 67, 1000 Berlin 37 hase@netmbx.UUCP
>I think, you may be right in what I think you're thinking. (Douglas Adams)


For info about transputers read the book 'PRINCIPLES OF PARALLEL AND
MULTIPROCESSING" by Desrochers from McGraw Hill.

UUCP: {cbosgd hplabs!hp-sdd sdcsvax nosc}!crash!pnet01!fred
ARPA: crash!pnet01!fred@nosc.mil
INET: fred@pnet01.cts.com