Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!ncifcrf!lhc!usenet
From: usenet@nlm.nih.gov (usenet news poster)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: 64-bits
Message-ID: <1990Aug22.222045.8100@nlm.nih.gov>
Date: 22 Aug 90 22:20:45 GMT
References: <9883@ganymede.inmos.co.uk>
Reply-To: states@tech.NLM.NIH.GOV (David States)
Organization: National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, Md.
Lines: 14

<9883@ganymede.inmos.co.uk> davidb@inmos.co.uk (David Boreham) writes:
% Everyone seems to be making the assumption that we will want
% to have a *DIFFERENT* text space for *EACH* processor, and
% therefore make comments about not being able to afford the
% disks etc. However, consider the situation where every processor
% in a computer wanted to see the same virtual address space...

This is not so far off.  IBM will be glad to show you the space on the
RS/6000 board where the fiber cable goes, and at least one company is
marketting an add in board based on fiber optic links that will permit
shared VM between heterologous processors.  The software issues for
the latter boggle my humble mind.

David States