(none)

Thread View: comp.sys.transputer

2 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

2 total messages Started by David Boreham Tue, 13 Mar 1990 18:12

#2931

Author: David Boreham
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 1990 18:12

38 lines
2427 bytes

This is a followup to a posting by Friedrich Luecking of Parsytec about
compatibility so if you haven't read that you won't understand this. 

Well anyway, he's absolutely correct. The people who are compatible with
the INMOS ``standards'' are being compatible with something which was only
supposed to solve a limited subset of the possible uses for transputer 
subsystems. In fact (speaking personally here), the only hardware standard
which INMOS feels really pleased with is TRAMs (and we still haven't got
round to documenting that properly yet). All the reset stuff is a bit of
a mess and we would be much happier with differential links.

Parsytec and some of the others have tried to take things a deal further
than INMOS in terms of building things like redundant systems and multiuser
clusters. You can't do that stuff with the INMOS standards.

I'm not saying that I agree with everything that Parsytec have done. For 
instance the link connectors are a little over the top for my liking and
the fact that every processor can kill its neighbours is a bit dangerous. 

We (the systems people in INMOS) have always thought that it would be a good
idea to get everybody together to agree some hardware standards. However, the
fact that this takes time and money and that everyone seemed to be doing 
reasonably well meant that nothing ever got off the ground. Having said that,
the fact that we published the TRAM document before releasing TRAMs and have
helped a number of other TRAM vendors iron out incompatabilities in their boards
shows commitment to the idea.

We definitely will call a conference of some kind about subsystems standards
for H1, probably this summer sometime.

I hope this adds some balance to the discussion. 

(Apologies to INMOS newsreaders who will see this article twice, but
 I'm still a long way from sez's record :)

David Boreham, INMOS Limited | mail(uk): davidb@inmos.co.uk or ukc!inmos!davidb
Bristol,  England            |     (us): uunet!inmos.com!davidb
+44 454 616616 ex 547        | Internet: davidb@inmos.com

Re:

#2932

Author: Steven Ericsson Zenith
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 1990 16:06

18 lines
1282 bytes

In article <201.9003131812@brac.inmos.co.uk>, davidb@inmos.COM (David
Boreham) writes:
> 
> (Apologies to INMOS newsreaders who will see this article twice, but
>  I'm still a long way from sez's record :)
> 
Yes, my apologies for my previous multiple post to this group. Locally,
it seemed 
that I was having trouble posting. It turned out to be a post news
anomally caused
by the absence of a blank line at the end of my post.

--
.                                                                        .
Steven Ericsson Zenith              *            email: zenith@cs.yale.edu
Department of Computer Science      |            voice: (203) 432 1278
Yale University 51 Prospect Street New Haven CT 06520 USA.
     "All can know beauty as beauty only because there is ugliness"

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads