Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!uwm.edu!ogicse!emory!hubcap!ernstl
From: ernstl@dnlunx.pttrnl.nl (Lubach E.)
Newsgroups: comp.parallel
Subject: Re: What sort of applications are worth parallelising?
Message-ID: <8172@hubcap.clemson.edu>
Date: 27 Feb 90 13:27:08 GMT
Sender: fpst@hubcap.clemson.edu
Lines: 25
Approved: parallel@hubcap.clemson.edu

ken%aiai.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK (Ken Johnson) writes:

>Until someone asked me the question, I had just been parallelising
>algorithms for the fun of it.  But: what sort of application is really
>worth all the effort of parallelising?

Well, the answer to this question is fairly simple. You want to parallelise
application because it takes to @##%%$%^ long to do it sequentially.
Name every heavy duty application in terms of computational effort and in
principle it is worth parallelising. This does not mean however that
every application is well-suited for parallelising. This depends on the
ordering of the operations in an algorithm. For correctness of the
algorithm some operations have to be executed in a strict order, thus
imposing constraints on the parallelising.
If you want to map parallel algorithms onto chip, preferably your algorithm
should be very regular. In general, however this is not necessary?
Irregular parallel algorithms just require more inventive thinking to map
them onto some kind of multiprocessor configuration.

>A sub-question: What sort of application is worth parallelising with a
>parallel logic language like Strand-88 or Parlog?

			Ernst Lubach

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------E_Lubach@pttrnl.nl                  "Beam me up,Scottie" J. Kirk