Comments on: How Much of the Industry Will Go Parallel? http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/ A Blog on Parallel Programming and Concurrency by Michael Suess Sat, 25 May 2013 23:54:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Knowing .NET » Blog Archive » How Much of the Industry Will Go Parallel? http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/comment-page-1/#comment-97929 Knowing .NET » Blog Archive » How Much of the Industry Will Go Parallel? Wed, 08 Jul 2009 13:24:58 +0000 http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/#comment-97929 [...] Seuss ponders one of my favorite questions: How much of the software industry will have to deal with the concurrent computing [opportunity]? He hits the vital [...] [...] Seuss ponders one of my favorite questions: How much of the software industry will have to deal with the concurrent computing [opportunity]? He hits the vital [...]

]]> By: Naveen http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/comment-page-1/#comment-17966 Naveen Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:00:26 +0000 http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/#comment-17966 Regarding your comment about non-intrusively, intelligently presenting information based on current context (ie searching other emails while typing a current one) - Remembrance Agent was an early research prototype. It did something similar, although it indexed your entire home directory and used emacs for the interface: http://www.remem.org/ But it's definitely a good use of a multicore architecture. Regarding your comment about non-intrusively, intelligently presenting information based on current context (ie searching other emails while typing a current one) - Remembrance Agent was an early research prototype.

It did something similar, although it indexed your entire home directory and used emacs for the interface:

http://www.remem.org/

But it’s definitely a good use of a multicore architecture.

]]> By: rodrigob http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/comment-page-1/#comment-11560 rodrigob Mon, 04 Jun 2007 11:23:30 +0000 http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/#comment-11560 """ What if [...]your email application analyzed the text you are typing as you type it, looking for similar mails you have written or received in the background and keeps them at a handy place? An application like that is possible with today’s computing power - yet I have never seen it. """ Dashboard, almost vapourware, but a functional alpha version exist. http://www.nat.org/dashboard/ http://code.google.com/p/dashboard/ http://beagle-project.org/Summer_Of_Code_2007#Dashboard “”"
What if [...]your email application analyzed the text you are typing as you type it, looking for similar mails you have written or received in the background and keeps them at a handy place? An application like that is possible with today’s computing power - yet I have never seen it.
“”"

Dashboard, almost vapourware, but a functional alpha version exist.

http://www.nat.org/dashboard/
http://code.google.com/p/dashboard/
http://beagle-project.org/Summer_Of_Code_2007#Dashboard

]]> By: Alexander Petrov http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/comment-page-1/#comment-11173 Alexander Petrov Thu, 31 May 2007 17:38:35 +0000 http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/#comment-11173 >> This second group views parallelism as a chance to do new things and provide value that was not possible before. >> Google think so too... - http://code.google.com/apis/gears/api_workerpool.html Google equip his new offline\online application with workerpool - host for JavaScript "processes" with message-oriented collaboration architecture (smth like Erlang style). >>
This second group views parallelism as a chance to do new things and provide value that was not possible before.
>>

Google think so too… -
http://code.google.com/apis/gears/api_workerpool.html
Google equip his new offline\online application with workerpool - host for JavaScript “processes” with message-oriented collaboration architecture (smth like Erlang style).

]]> By: Michael Suess http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/comment-page-1/#comment-11108 Michael Suess Thu, 31 May 2007 07:56:27 +0000 http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/#comment-11108 Thanks for all your very insightful comments, keep them coming, I am enjoying them a lot. I don't have the time to comment on every comment, as I am preparing for a trip to China right now, but insightful as they are, most of them could not benefit much from a comment from me anyways :-) Thanks for all your very insightful comments, keep them coming, I am enjoying them a lot. I don’t have the time to comment on every comment, as I am preparing for a trip to China right now, but insightful as they are, most of them could not benefit much from a comment from me anyways :-)

]]> By: Rintoul http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/comment-page-1/#comment-11078 Rintoul Wed, 30 May 2007 23:36:28 +0000 http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/#comment-11078 Much is already being done in parallel for sure. Superscalar, parallel pipelines, VLIW, this kind of stuff is done at the hardware level already - a lot of parallelism types of things have been implemented at the hardware level that started out as stuff uncovered in compiler research... I say keep as much invisible to the programmer as possible! Much is already being done in parallel for sure. Superscalar, parallel pipelines, VLIW, this kind of stuff is done at the hardware level already - a lot of parallelism types of things have been implemented at the hardware level that started out as stuff uncovered in compiler research… I say keep as much invisible to the programmer as possible!

]]> By: Bart Samwel http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/comment-page-1/#comment-11043 Bart Samwel Wed, 30 May 2007 18:50:51 +0000 http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/#comment-11043 <i>Or present you with a few Ebay-listings. Wikipedia. Google search results. Related books on Amazon.</i> And of course ads. Remember <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/03/google_eavesdropping_software/" rel="nofollow">Google's eavesdropping software</a>? More cores could definitely help provide us with more targeted ads, based on anything we're doing. I wonder what business models <i>that</i> will lead to. I hope it will help to keep all of the content we're accessing free of charge. :-) Or present you with a few Ebay-listings. Wikipedia. Google search results. Related books on Amazon.

And of course ads. Remember Google’s eavesdropping software? More cores could definitely help provide us with more targeted ads, based on anything we’re doing. I wonder what business models that will lead to. I hope it will help to keep all of the content we’re accessing free of charge. :-)

]]> By: Terrence Liao http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/comment-page-1/#comment-11014 Terrence Liao Wed, 30 May 2007 12:10:04 +0000 http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/#comment-11014 Companies who have some sort of scientific modeling have been doing parallel on parallel system from the beginning. It is a question how fast those desktop applications will be (or will not be) migrated to multi-core arch on PC. The "do-nothing" approach will improve the performance as long as the cpu's clockspeed does not decrease (hopping with the 4.7GHz POWER6 in the market now, we will see clock speed to increase again.) . But long-term solution might be parallelism. But does it really matter to most users that runtime of a desktop app drop from, say 4 seconds to 1 second in quad-core. There is also question how many developers can think parallel, if not, their parallel port apps might post more runtime problem. (Take me about 2 months to fix a Heisenbug which has been sleep for many years! Picture this sometime in the future, a app on my many-core PC suddenly frozen, and the user support told me, it is O.K. only 1 very 1000 people will have this problem..... What a nightmare!) Companies who have some sort of scientific modeling have been doing parallel on parallel system from the beginning. It is a question how fast those desktop applications will be (or will not be) migrated to multi-core arch on PC. The “do-nothing” approach will improve the performance as long as the cpu’s clockspeed does not decrease (hopping with the 4.7GHz POWER6 in the market now, we will see clock speed to increase again.) . But long-term solution might be parallelism. But does it really matter to most users that runtime of a desktop app drop from, say 4 seconds to 1 second in quad-core. There is also question how many developers can think parallel, if not, their parallel port apps might post more runtime problem. (Take me about 2 months to fix a Heisenbug which has been sleep for many years! Picture this sometime in the future, a app on my many-core PC suddenly frozen, and the user support told me, it is O.K. only 1 very 1000 people will have this problem….. What a nightmare!)

]]> By: Tom Kirby-Green http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/comment-page-1/#comment-11000 Tom Kirby-Green Wed, 30 May 2007 08:23:25 +0000 http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/#comment-11000 Well first of all if I look at the threads in a potentially runnable state on my Windows box then it's fairly clear that an OS scheduler could make useful use of a lot of cores. Which would give me a 'smoother ride' as a end user. With regard to what I'd use those cores for today - dealing with I/O latencies and servicing some PLINQ type infrastructure would be my first bet - I most certainly wouldn't want to be doing 80 * _beginthreadex explicitly :-) Well first of all if I look at the threads in a potentially runnable state on my Windows box then it’s fairly clear that an OS scheduler could make useful use of a lot of cores. Which would give me a ’smoother ride’ as a end user. With regard to what I’d use those cores for today - dealing with I/O latencies and servicing some PLINQ type infrastructure would be my first bet - I most certainly wouldn’t want to be doing 80 * _beginthreadex explicitly :-)

]]> By: bong http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/comment-page-1/#comment-10996 bong Wed, 30 May 2007 07:23:33 +0000 http://www.thinkingparallel.com/2007/05/29/how-much-of-the-industry-will-go-parallel/#comment-10996 What about the presumed drop in core speeds? If you put 100 cores in a processor, it is *not* possible to keep the core speed even close to the level of current multicores without a house-size cooling system... I think that all applications need to use parallelism in the future for the computing power of a single core in such a processor is not enough. Current programming models, frameworks and languages surely won't be enough. For a reference, read: "The Landscape of Parallel Computing Research: A View from Berkeley" by Asanovic et al. [http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/2006/EECS-2006-183.pdf] What is your take on this? What about the presumed drop in core speeds? If you put 100 cores in a processor, it is *not* possible to keep the core speed even close to the level of current multicores without a house-size cooling system…

I think that all applications need to use parallelism in the future for the computing power of a single core in such a processor is not enough. Current programming models, frameworks and languages surely won’t be enough.

For a reference, read: “The Landscape of Parallel Computing Research: A View from Berkeley” by Asanovic et al. [http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/2006/EECS-2006-183.pdf]

What is your take on this?

]]>