Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!houxm!mtuxo!mtune!codas!peora!joel From: joel@peora.UUCP (Joel Upchurch) Newsgroups: net.arch Subject: Re: VERY LARGE main memories; HOW M Message-ID: <2474@peora.UUCP> Date: Thu, 23-Oct-86 11:43:00 EDT Article-I.D.: peora.2474 Posted: Thu Oct 23 11:43:00 1986 Date-Received: Fri, 24-Oct-86 08:05:49 EDT References: <1128@tekig5.UUCP> <5100141@ccvaxa> <553@cubsvax.UUCP> Organization: Concurrent Computer Corporation, Orlando, Fl Lines: 26 >Peter S. Shenkin {philabs,rna}!cubsvax!peters cubsvax!peters@columbia.ARPA >> >>Rotating machinery is still cheaper than silicon. > >And the advent of R/W optical disks will make this truer; even though you >can only write once, and access is basically sequential, a large part of >their use will be to replace disk rather than tape. For instance, I'm This discussion started on the virtues of virtual versus non-virtual memory systems. The optical devices I've heard of so far would make terrible paging devices. The disadvantages of using a WORM optical disk as paging device are obvious. Even proposed devices that could rewrite blocks, would not make good paging devices because of the awful seek times and rather anemic transfer rates associated with these devices. Has anyone seen any optical disks with numbers in these categories comparable to good magnetic disks? That is not to say that a optical disk dosn't beat the Hell out of having the data sitting in the tape library. -- Joel Upchurch @ CONCURRENT Computer Corporation (A Perkin-Elmer Company) Southern Development Center 2486 Sand Lake Road/ Orlando, Florida 32809/ (305)850-1031 {decvax!ucf-cs, ihnp4!pesnta, vax135!petsd, akgua!codas}!peora!joel