home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!spool.mu.edu!sgiblab!news.kpc.com!kpc!kpc.com!jog
- From: jog@kpc.com (Rajeev Jog)
- Newsgroups: comp.arch
- Subject: Re: COMPAQ PROPOSED SCALABLE I/O ARCHITECTURE
- Message-ID: <jog.724707529@kpc.com>
- Date: 18 Dec 92 19:38:49 GMT
- References: <1992Dec15.171554.2781@twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com> <1992Dec15.194637.10009@eng.umd.edu> <1992Dec15.205639.25591@super.org> <1992Dec16.160054.2486@twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com>
- Sender: usenet@kpc.com
- Organization: Kubota Pacific Computers Inc.
- Lines: 29
-
- simonich@croatia.eng.hou.compaq.com (Chris Simonich) writes:
-
- Dear Compaq'ers: please look at SCI again.
-
- > We have received this response from several people. We
- > disagree. For one SCI had a physical topology (a ring) that
- > is not suitable for expansion I/O. Yes, we know you can run
- > the ring to and from the same board and create a topology
-
- A ring is not the only topology for SCI. A ring is *convenient*
- for several applications, however any topology that can
- be devised from point-to-point links works.
-
- > around here) were trying to solve different problems with
- > cost, not bandwidth, being the major one. The fact that the
- > 'C' in SCI stands for coherent I think brings out one of the
- > differences in approach. We needed an I/O interface and
-
- It's true that 33% of the name is "COHERENT", but in reality,
- the overhead is not a whole lot (coherence adds 2 bits in the packet
- header) and you can quite easily skip the coherence aspects of the
- protocol if you want to, *while leaving yourself the option to add
- it in future parts*.
-
- --
- Rajeev Jog
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Kubota Pacific Computer Inc. +1 408 727 8100
- 2630 Walsh Avenue, Santa Clara, CA. 95051-0905, USA. jog@kpc.com
-