Re: Paired 68000 systems for fault tolerance - was Re: out-of-mainstream minis

2015-07-04 Thread Toby Thain
On 2015-07-04 12:00 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote: On 2015-07-04 17:09, Toby Thain wrote: ... I likely was thinking of Stratus, because I remember reading this before: http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~david/papers/ibmsj1987_stratus.pdf Unfortunately, that paper can slightly confuse you. They talk about

Re: Paired 68000 systems for fault tolerance - was Re: out-of-mainstream minis

2015-07-04 Thread Johnny Billquist
On 2015-07-04 17:09, Toby Thain wrote: On 2015-07-03 11:13 PM, Jon Elson wrote: On 07/03/2015 09:11 PM, Toby Thain wrote: On 2015-07-03 8:09 PM, Glen Slick wrote: Apollo is the classic example of using plain 68K (two). I always associate it with Tandem: http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/ta

Re: Paired 68000 systems for fault tolerance - was Re: out-of-mainstream minis

2015-07-04 Thread Mark Linimon
On Sat, Jul 04, 2015 at 11:09:20AM -0400, Toby Thain wrote: > Yes, you are right. The report gives some examples of dual 68000's in > Tandem's peripheral subsystems. Later systems had dual 68302s in the Service Processors. I know -- I maintained that code for a while :-) mcl

Re: Paired 68000 systems for fault tolerance - was Re: out-of-mainstream minis

2015-07-04 Thread Toby Thain
On 2015-07-03 11:13 PM, Jon Elson wrote: On 07/03/2015 09:11 PM, Toby Thain wrote: On 2015-07-03 8:09 PM, Glen Slick wrote: Apollo is the classic example of using plain 68K (two). I always associate it with Tandem: http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/tandem/TR-86.2.pdf Not sure what you are