Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!hp4nl!botter!star.cs.vu.nl!sater From: sater@cs.vu.nl (Hans van Staveren) Newsgroups: comp.os.minix Subject: Re: Amoeba on Token Ring Message-ID: <2674@sater.cs.vu.nl> Date: 31 May 89 14:59:12 GMT References: <16240@louie.udel.EDU> <760@scaup.cl.cam.ac.uk> <762@scaup.cl.cam.ac.uk> Reply-To: sater@cs.vu.nl (Hans van Staveren) Distribution: comp Organization: VU Informatica, Amsterdam Lines: 25 In article <762@scaup.cl.cam.ac.uk> scc@cl.cam.ac.uk (Stephen Crawley) writes: > >So Amoeba on a token ring may be feasible. But don't blame me if your >token ring bogs down with floods of broadcast packets :-). > >One time, someone at Cambridge doing something like this with a handful >of client/server pairs managed to bring our ethernet to its knees. My >workstation was spending 100% of its time fending off Amoeba broadcasts. > >-- Steve I do not like to react as hurt in my feelings, but there is no way that the current Amoeba software will ever generate a broadcast storm. There is special code to prevent, even in pathological cases like fast client and slow server, the occurence of more than ~20 broadcasts per second. I do not say that this is very little, but it only occurs in pretty strange cases, and it will most certainly not bring an Ethernet to it's knees. Our installation here runs some 40 Amoeba poolprocessors, mostly 68020's, on the same Ethernet as lots of Sun's and various other stuff. Had it been that bad someone would certainly have complained to me. Hans van Staveren Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Holland