Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!uwvax!oddjob!mimsy!chris
From: chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: What's a "tahoe"?
Message-ID: <12889@mimsy.UUCP>
Date: 7 Aug 88 22:32:12 GMT
References: <6341@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <60859@sun.uucp> <474@m3.mfci.UUCP> <2620@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742
Lines: 23

>In article <3259@leo.UUCP> jack@leo.UUCP (Jack Benkual) writes:
>>... architecture similar to VAX/780 and probably that ...
>>and the higher performance ... was the reason that Berkeley
>>released 4.3-Tahoe.

In article <2620@pt.cs.cmu.edu> ralphw@ius3.ius.cs.cmu.edu (Ralph Hyre) writes:
>Well, I also heard (from a combination of Byte and the USENET, I believe)
>that development work moved from Vaxen to CCI machines because of the
>EXTREME difficulty of getting needed technical information out of DEC
>(at the time, they may have changed now).

The difficulty is still there; but on the other hand, CCI and Harris
have not exactly been shoving information at Berkeley either.  The
improved performance was certainly one reason for the switch; the fact
that Sam Leffler had already done much of the work anyway was another.
It is also nice to have two differing architectures around in order
to test portability: the new VM will be able to run on a virtual-
address-cache architecture right away, since the Tahoe is such a machine.
(Incidentally, tweaking the old VAX-oriented code to work on that machine
took surprisingly few changes.)
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163)
Domain:	chris@mimsy.umd.edu	Path:	uunet!mimsy!chris