On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 6:44 AM, erik quanstrom <quans...@quanstro.net>wrote:
> > At the hardware level we do have message passing between a > > processor and the memory controller -- this is exactly the > > same as talking to a shared server and has the same issues of > > scaling etc. If you have very few clients, a single shared > > server is indeed a cost effective solution. > > just to repeat myself in a context that hopefully makes things > clearer: sometimes we don't admit it's a network. and that's > not always a bad thing. > > - erik > > Yes, we abstract things so it doesn't look like it is... so we can have a programming model where we don't have to care about keeping all the distributed bits in sync. However, I get the feeling that those abstractions, at any level, suffer from the same weaknesses. Well I think that's why certain RISC instruction sets have instructions like eieio anyway :-) Dave
