Messages in this thread | | | Subject | [ANNOUNCE] udev 0.1 release | From | Chris Hanson <> | Date | Fri, 11 Apr 2003 16:23:46 -0400 |
| |
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 16:16:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Mike Dresser <mdresser_l@windsormachine.com>
On Fri, 11 Apr 2003, John Bradford wrote:
> Now, assuming a voltage drop of 0.05V across each cable... > > :-) > > John. > Ah yes, I was going to mention that, but didn't know which way would be better. My instinct tells me the massively parallel, but I could and probably am wrong again. :)
Using a tree (what you are calling massively parallel) for distribution produces a uniform voltage drop for all of the devices, and has a better worst-case voltage drop than a serial chaining distribution. The serial chain has different voltage drops for each pair of disks, depending on how far down the chain they are, but the worst case is very bad.
The reason is that the tree has O(log N) depth, and the serial chain has O(N) depth.
Chris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |