MIT scientists craft a storage system fit for THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE Distributed file systems may be cheap to run, but their performance can be atrocious when the network becomes saturated, and some boffins are hoping to change this so to better simulate our universe. MIT researchers have tried to solve the network saturation problems bought about by SSD-loaded distributed storage systems with …
This tech sees the boffins sit field-programmable gate arrays (FPGA) between the host computer and the storage, and lash them together via their own network. The result is a low-latency, high bandwidth, scalable storage system that has an order of magnitude greater performance than Microsoft's rival "CORFU" system PDFThe secret to this performance increase is the combination of PCIe-based flash storage with a storage controller implemented on an FPGA that is linked to all other controllers by multi-gigabit low latency serial links with a SERialize/DESerializer (SERDES) function that is implemented directly within each FPGA.
Don't make an enemy or opponent of the emboldened surreal and new reality masters of universes for they be the new boss and nothing like the old boss ...... and the really weird question to be asking MIT of BlueDBM ........ Do they imagine IT realises a Virtual Rogue Office of Strategic Services? ..... as A.N.Others do in Programmable Quantum Fields that Realise Imaginanation full to overflowing with Creative Phormations and Phished Dishes.
And if not, would it worth the same to them, as to a Wild Wacky Western competitor or Exotic Erotic Eastern opponent and is it priceless?
An equally valid question to be asking at the same time of MIT and BlueDBM is ..... Do they realise IT imagines a Virtual Rogue Office of Strategic Services? ...... as A.N.Others have done and which have moved on to New Orderly World Order ReProgramming of Projects and Pogroms.
[And a change of post date stamp, El Reg, to zero post date stamp? Why is that?]
"a change of post date stamp, El Reg, to zero post date stamp? Why is that?"
So that when you see two posts both timestamped "Posted 1 day ago", you can't readily tell which was posted earlier? In line with the company's policy of continuous product and service improvement?
It must be progress, mustn't it? I mean, 2004/01/29 11:50GMT is so hard to work out isn't it.
Thanks for that, AC, it tells us a lot.
Like, whereas a double negative is usually a positive, bullshit on top of bullshit is whole greater lode of bullshit.
And do you get irony and sarcasm mixed up, too, or even mistake it for something else which would mock everything?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2023
