Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!ccavax!merriman
From: merriman@ccavax.camb.com
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Centralized vs distributed computing
Message-ID: <20059.26079ecc@ccavax.camb.com>
Date: 21 Mar 90 20:33:32 GMT
References: <9003210649.AA06750@jade.berkeley.edu>
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
Lines: 19

In article <9003210649.AA06750@jade.berkeley.edu>, 
    C506634@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU ("Eric Edwards") writes:

> . . .
>
> Use smaller, cheaper, and less capable micros to provide the user interface and
>  run small jobs.  When the going gets tough they could send the job to central
> supercomputer.  A smaller central machine would be needed then would be
> required with a strictly centralized system.  Not only do the actual cycles not
>  goint to supporting the user interface but also  becuase the system could run
> close to capasity.  Response time is not much of an issue if the jobs are slow
> anyway.  You still waste mips on the micros but since they are smaller machines
>  and probably not state of the art machines the mips they waste cost less.

Sounds like a Local Area Vax Cluster with DECnet/DOS for the PC-type machines.

> Also, the communication links don't need as much capicity.
It turns out that anything less that Ethernet is a drag because of file
transfer times.