21 Feb
2012
21 Feb
'12
12:39 a.m.
On 20 Feb 2012 at 16:09, Eric Smith wrote:
There were certainly a lot of supercomputers that
didn't have RAS as
defined above.
Certainly on serviceability. MTTR simetimes much longer than the
usual mainframe of the day (e.g. Cray "bubbles", ETA 10...). Not
nearly as reliable, certainly. Accessible? Certainly no better than
the average mainframe.
Even though I spent a fair amount of my professional life on
supercomputers, I haven't the faintest idea of how to define them in
non-marketing terms. Evevn less so on "minisupercomputers".
Were there any "midisupercomputers"? (Feels like we're getting into
"hemidemisemiquaver" territory...)
--Chuck