[RC5] Adverse effects of NON participation!

Jon Back 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
promptly assimilated.

----- 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
not
> running the client? As an example, consider a server that usually sits
idle
> 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
and
> 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
will
> 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 mailing list