|Date: ||Mon, 18 Sep 2006 16:16:12 +0200|
|Reply-To: ||SAS-L List <email@example.com>|
|Sender: ||"SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>|
|From: ||Robert Bardos <bardos2@ANSYS.CH>|
|Subject: ||Re: PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS|
|Content-Type: ||text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"|
You are not talking about Geographically Dispersed Parallel
Sysplexes, I suppose <g>?
Von: SAS(r) Discussion [mailto:SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU]Im Auftrag
Gesendet: Montag, 18. September 2006 15:41
Betreff: Re: PC SAS vs. Mainframe SAS
I read that a Sony Playstation 3 would have more processing power
Cray supercomputer did in 1999. Astounding growth rates of
Now think in terms of the PC evolution. By this Christmas,
on a PC is probably in the range of 8x what it was last Christmas
and it was
damn fast then. The problem with the mainframe architecture is
that by the
time it is in place, it is way obsolete.
The biggest business processing happening today (I would argue) is
Microsoft, Amazon, and Google. There are over 1 million servers
and they are growing at an outstanding rate. The biggest issue
facing, in fact, is power hence all are buying property near major
stations such as dams. With web services, it will. again push the
of what is possible and thereby increase the computing load. By
next year, SAS users will also be able to tap into this power with
With such high growth rates, the need to be able to swap out
wholesale is critical. A mainframe is a concept that made a lot of
one point but now it comes down to massive clusters of machines
operating in a grid like fashion. Cells actually.
Savian "Bridging SAS and Microsoft Technologies"