From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 16:07:56 +0100 From: Uriel To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] killing processes Message-ID: <20050915150756.GO30467@server4.lensbuddy.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Topicbox-Message-UUID: 88a991ae-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 04:44:46PM +0200, Fco. J. Ballesteros wrote: > : In that sense, the 'cpu server' is outdated nomenclature. > I wonder, how many 9fans are *actually* using CPU servers? [do not > count a CPU server that runs your fossil as such, it's a file server, > isn't it?] I think it's already mentioned in the original papers that one of the main reason for 'cpu' servers is bandwidth/proximity to the file server(s), so I in a way it has always been a misnomer. uriel