Template talk:Parallel computing

Notifications

Please don't add stream procesing onto Parallel Computing. Stream Processing is a method of procesing warp (aka threads) base on / originated from event-driven orientated programming, these technologies are thus use on some GPU processors, and they are more concerned with the Kernel Engineering and Scheduling mechanism of the microarchitecture of a CPU than directly related to the Parallel Computing Template. --Ramu50 (talk) 18:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Hardware section

I am wondering should we decrease the amount of links in the Hardware section, because most of the technologies present in Hardware are directly related to Processor Technologies and if we expand it the template will be overloaded. Also when adding Programming section, I think we should try to add only navigation articles and not expand every single one of them. --Ramu50 (talk) 18:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think all the links currently under Hardware are reasonably relevant to parallel computing, except maybe Vector processing. Letdorf (talk) 21:35, 22 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Vector processing is most certainly a parallel computing topic. Raul654 (talk) 21:36, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

Is Preemptive Multitaksing part of parallel computing. --Ramu50 (talk) 22:18, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. It's an operating system technology, not a CPU / computer architecture technology. Completely unrelated. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 20:07, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess we should we delete Computer multitasking from the navbox then? Letdorf (talk) 21:26, 22 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Since the template has a lot too technical CPU technologies that aren't even relevant to Parallel Computing at all. Things like NUMA, COMA, distributed memory, shared memory, we should just shorten up to Coherency and each of technical details be navigated under the subsection of the article. What you guys think. --Ramu50 (talk) 02:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? Everything you just named is related to distributed computing. Raul654 (talk) 02:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Those are all relevant to parallel computing. Why would you think they weren't? Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 02:11, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ramu50 - can you do me a favor? Please go read Pfister's "In search of Clusters", and get back to us... Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 02:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What make you thinks that all other have a less knowledge than you to even begin with, load of crap on bias contributions attitude. --Ramu50 (talk) 02:24, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is totally not true, Flynn's Taxtonomy, MIMO, SIMO, LIFO, FIFO...etc are all methodologies of processors microarchitecture implementations technologies, the fact that Parallel Computing, Distributed Computing, and Grid Computing utilize those technologies doesn't prove they are parallel computing technologies at all, even though the industry say so. What type of technologies you computational technologies you utilize from other types of sciences is a personal opinion or a corporation opinion of how a product is being built. I think too many people is mixing it up, I just look through some of the talk page and there has been a lot of problems on the talk on LIFO and FIFO.

Well if my above statement is wrong, then consequently anything that is a microarchitecture arrays design such as should also be Parallel Computing which is not true. Multiplexing

SISO (Single Input, Single Output)
SIMO (Single Input, Multiple Outputs)
MISO (Multiple Inputs, Single Output)
MIMO (Multiple Inputs, Multiple Outputs)

--Ramu50 (talk) 02:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]