From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <432995DC.10807@lanl.gov> Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:40:12 -0600 From: Ronald G Minnich User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050317) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] killing processes References: <20050915150756.GO30467@server4.lensbuddy.com> In-Reply-To: <20050915150756.GO30467@server4.lensbuddy.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Topicbox-Message-UUID: 88e51756-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Uriel wrote: > 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. yeah, but ... those cpu servers, IIRC, were big 'ol power challenge machines.Big fat SMP, faster than the terminals, much more memory, etc. I remember Rob's talk at '89 usenix (or some such) and it was clear at the time that the cpu servers really were where you did computing, not on your weakling terminal. Meant to be shared, by lots of folks, hence that ' ... big boys' comment in the startup code, reserving more kernel memory since there would be more users on a cpu than on a terminal. life has changed. ron