From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 17:05:02 +0100 From: Uriel To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] killing processes Message-ID: <20050915160502.GQ30467@server4.lensbuddy.com> References: <20050915150756.GO30467@server4.lensbuddy.com> 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: 8a04faac-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 11:27:51AM -0400, Russ Cox wrote: > This just isn't true. The cpu server lets you use its cpu. > And in the early days, it was a lot easier to buy a really fast > cpu server than it was to buy a really fast terminal. It's still > more cost-effective. I didn't say that wasn't the main reason, just that proximity to the file server was also a factor, I can't find the quote I'm looking for which I think was more explicit, but from http://www.cs.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/9.html "The effect of running a cpu command is therefore to start a shell on a fast machine, one more tightly coupled to the file server" And I wasn't as much trying to make history remark, as trying to point an important and often overlooked feature of 'cpu' servers. uriel