Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.arch > #5685

Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea?

Show all headers | View raw

Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201202.rodent.frell.theremailer.net>
writes:
> System Z (what you are calling 370) is actively developed and installed at
> 10s of thousands of sites as a primary machine. It's a lot easier to migrate
> C code that runs on SPARC to Intel and replace a server farm than it is to
> migrate assembler and COBOL that runs on IBM and there are advantages to IBM
> OS and hardware that SPARC doesn't offer over its competition.

current estimate is that there are 10,000 mainframes installed at
4000-5000 customers (I know some large financial institutions with
50-100 machines).
http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2010-08-10/news/27620495_1_mainframe-ibm-big-challenge

I've conjectured that heavy financial industry dependency on mainframes
contributed to Gerstner taking the job to resurrect IBM in the mid-90s
... although the business does continue mainframes ... its revenue is
now 83% software and services ... and everything else (including all
hardware platforms) is 17%. recent reference in ibm-main mailing list
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012.html#20

a couple other refs from (linkedin) Greater IBM (current/former
employees)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012.html#57
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012.html#104

other recent posts on the subject
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012.html#45
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012.html#92

recent mainframe z196 is rated at 50BIPS with 80 processors (previous
mainframe z10 was 24BIPS with 64 processors) ... or if every mainframe
in the world upgraded to maximum 80 processor configuration ... that
works at to 500TIPS
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012b.html#28
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012b.html#30

compared to on-demand supercomputer from Amazon cloud at 240TIPS (which
would rank 42nd in the world) ... lots of cloud mega-datacenters may
individually have more processing power than the aggregate of every
mainframe in the world today.

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-02 02:16 -0600
  Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-02-02 07:41 -0800
  Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-02-02 19:04 +0100
    Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-02 23:16 -0600
      Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201202.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2012-02-03 18:19 +0100
        Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-02-03 13:09 -0500
          Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-02-03 12:28 -0800
          Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-03 13:04 -0800
        Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Thomas Womack <twomack@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2012-02-03 19:15 +0000
          Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Mark Thorson <nospam@sonic.net> - 2012-02-03 13:08 -0800
            Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Thomas Womack <twomack@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2012-02-03 22:21 +0000
              Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Mark Thorson <nospam@sonic.net> - 2012-02-03 18:42 -0800
            Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-04 13:26 +0000
            Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201202.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2012-02-05 00:58 +0100
          Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-02-04 21:00 +0100
            Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-05 00:35 -0600
        Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-03 10:11 -0800
  Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-02-03 23:20 +0000
  Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-03 22:54 -0800
    Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-04 07:15 -0600
      Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-05 13:49 -0800
        Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-06 05:36 -0600
          Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-02-06 18:46 -0800
            Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-28 20:02 -0600
        Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-02-06 12:49 +0000
      Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-02-04 11:14 -0800
  Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-03 06:04 -0800
  Re: Are rotating register files still a bad idea? MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-02-03 12:20 -0800

csiph-web