Xref: utzoo news.groups:23092 comp.arch:17744 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!eagle!amelia!wilbur.nas.nasa.gov!eugene From: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya) Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.arch Subject: Re: comp.benchmark Message-ID: <7889@amelia.nas.nasa.gov> Date: 17 Aug 90 20:20:51 GMT References: <7858@amelia.nas.nasa.gov> Sender: news@amelia.nas.nasa.gov Reply-To: eugene@wilbur.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya) Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA Lines: 29 In article aglew@dual.crhc.uiuc.edu (Andy Glew) writes: >I want, and hope, for a "practical" benchmarking group, ... > Something like this is important. I've spent the last week >working around things like that. Moderation adds too much delay for >this sort of interaction. > >Conversely, a moderator would be useful for the more staid side of >benchmarking: reporting new results, theoretical questions, >announcements of availability, and so on. I don't know, I think you can have that. I think Steve Stevenson does a pretty good job moderating comp.parallel, and Peter Neumann on comp.risks. I do not think the delay is that critical. It is not just a function of time but also quality. >Flash! I just realized that what the USEnet needs is not moderated >newsgroups, but recommendation tags applied to various news messages. Perhaps. I'd like to see removing lots of the "me, too" postings, cutting down the attribution (editing), especially when attributing signatures. People do not really summarize what's transpired. Practical is benchmarking. The theory is MVA, queueing theory, simulation and emulation, in performance analysis. I want empirical stuff, too. --e. nobuo miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene