[RC5] Adverse effects of NON participation!
jonback at itexas.net
Mon Jan 31 18:48:04 EST 2000
I never thought of it that way, but I like it. The best "bull sh*t" reason I
ever came up with was describing the process to a Mechanical Engineer when I
described having RC5 running as if it were a flywheel, and that his PC would
be more responsive since his processor didn't have to do those pesky
startups and shutdowns when he took long pauses. He bought it, and was
----- Original Message -----
From: Dan Oetting <oetting at gldmutt.cr.usgs.gov>
To: <rc5 at lists.distributed.net>
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2000 11:17 AM
Subject: [RC5] Adverse effects of NON participation!
> Has anyone bothered to look at the additional stress on the CPU that is
> running the client? As an example, consider a server that usually sits
> but periodically gets a burst of work. The CPU on this server is going to
> be cool while idle between jobs then quickly heats up when a job starts
> cools down again when the job is done. Differential temperature changes
> during these heating and cooling cycles are going to create thermal
> stresses on the chip. These stresses can cause minor flaws in the chip to
> expand until a critical circuit is broken and the CPU fails.
> By running the client the CPU is always busy so the thermal variations
> be minimized.
> -- Dan Oetting <oetting at ghtmail.cr.usgs.gov>
> To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
> rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest
To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest
More information about the rc5