Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 1st May 2006 03:03 UTC
Windows Kurt Hudson explains tricks to optimize applications on multiprocessor computers, even if those applications were developed without such systems in mind.
Thread beginning with comment 119856
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Only for Windows users
by ivans on Mon 1st May 2006 12:54 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Only for Windows users"
ivans
Member since:
2005-12-03

Because Linux and UNIX have been running on dual
core (and 64-bit platforms) for far longer than NT,
ergo they "embraced" it much earlier.


Oh please, NT ran on 64b Alpha AXP ever since the first release in '93. Moreover - it was developed on i860 (N10) simulator in '89, which was marketed as 64b (although it wasn't truly, but that's Intel's marketing crap ;)

And more important thing - it was SMP-ready from the start.

When did the linux go fully preemtpive and got rid of lock_kernel() after almost every syscall? In 2002? LOL ;)

And the FBSD of the "Giant" mutex? ;)

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: Only for Windows users
by nick on Mon 1st May 2006 13:17 in reply to "RE[4]: Only for Windows users"
nick Member since:
2006-04-17

Oh please, NT ran on 64b Alpha AXP ever since the first release in '93.

IRIX was running 64-bit MIPS in 91.

I didn't say NT was behind ALL unixes in both dual core
and 64-bitness. That would be stupid considering there
are unixes that will never be 64-bit or SMP capable.

Moreover - it was developed on i860 (N10) simulator in '89, which was marketed as 64b (although it wasn't truly, but that's Intel's marketing crap ;)

And more important thing - it was SMP-ready from the start.

More important? Who said anything about importance?
More important than what? Fixing security holes, or...?

Linux did not support SMP from the start. It would have
been a stupid design choice, given its target market
and resources to begin with.

When did the linux go fully preemtpive and got rid of lock_kernel() after almost every syscall? In 2002? LOL ;)

Yeah I imagine it would have been at least 2 years
before it was running on 1024 CPU systems in '04.

And the FBSD of the "Giant" mutex? ;)

And WNT of its instability and security holes? ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Only for Windows users
by ivans on Mon 1st May 2006 14:12 in reply to "RE[5]: Only for Windows users"
ivans Member since:
2005-12-03

IRIX was running 64-bit MIPS in 91

And System/38 (and later AS/400) had 64b/128b non-VNA architecture more than 10 years before IRIX and NT (or any other OS) ....your point is what?

You claimed that Linux and *nix general embraced SMP much earlier than NT, which supported it as an original design goal? That sounds like trolling to me.

Linux did not support SMP from the start. It would have been a stupid design choice, given its target market and resources to begin with.

Yes, having a big f.... kernel lock for 11 years has nothing to do with incomptence of it's developers...yeah right.

Yeah I imagine it would have been at least 2 years
before it was running on 1024 CPU systems in '04.


On penny-stock almost-bankrupt SGI systems? LOL ;)

And WNT of its instability and security holes? ;)

I presume the last time you used Windows was back in the mid-1990s...right?

As for the security: not so long ago, almost everyone could trade linux 0days on undernet..

Reply Parent Score: 1