They will probably use them all. But isn't the one available on PCs for less than $1000 the shared main memory? A real market there. And it's true that there are many cases which are very difficult to coordinate with multiple processors. But there are some which are easy. They are a good place to start. We should not let the cases that are hard prevent the investigation of the cases which are easy.
On Dec 20, 2007 11:27 AM, Steven H. Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Don Guinn wrote: > > As to moving data around between various memories - I am not really > clear on > > the architecture of multi-core systems, but don't they consist of > multiple > > processors, each processor having its own cache but sharing a common > main > > memory? If so, then there is not a problem of having to move blocks of > data > > among different main memories. > There is a problem moving blocks of data between different chunks of > memory. It may be possible to hide the problem from application > programmers some, or even most, of the time, but it's there and it has a > cost. Partitioning a problem among available memory and processors > efficiently is often non-trivial. > > There is not one multi-core architecture, but many. Different degrees > of parallelism and different workloads can drive different architectural > decisions. Processors may be symmetric or asymmetric, with local and/or > shared memory. Processors may communicate via shared memory, buses, or > crossbar switches. It isn't clear which architecture(s) general purpose > computers will use. > > # Steve > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
