HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: eugene@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Subject: [l/m 10/14/92] SLALOM				(13/28) c.be FAQ
Keywords: who, what, where, when, why, how
Organization: NAS Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 12:25:22 GMT
Reply-To: eugene@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)

13	SLALOM							<This panel>
14
15	12 Ways to Fool the Masses with Benchmarks
16	SPEC
17	Benchmark invalidation methods
18
19	WPI Benchmark
20	Equivalence
21	TPC
22
23
24
25	Ridiculously short benchmarks
26	Other miscellaneous benchmarks
27
28	References
1	Introduction to FAQ chain and netiquette
2
3	PERFECT
4
5	Performance Metrics
6	Temporary scaffold of New FAQ material
7	Music to benchmark by
8	Benchmark types
9	Linpack
10
11	NIST source and .orgs
12	Benchmark Environments

%A J. Gustafson
%A D. Rover
%A S. Elbert
%A M. Carter
%Z U. of Iowa, Ames Lab.
%T SLALOM: The First Scalable Supercomputer Benchmark
%J Joural of Parallel and Distributed Computing
%V 12
%N 4 
%D August 1991
%P 388-401
%r Supercomputing Review
%d November 1990

%A John Gustafson
%A Diane Rover
%A Stephen Elbert
%A Michael Carter
%T The Design of a Scalable, Fixed-Time Computer Benchmark
%R IS-5049/UC-32
%I Ames Lab, Iowa State University
%D 1990

And other sources.

Archive-directory: tantalus.al.iastate.edu:/pub/Slalom/ [129.186.200.15]
Tantalus.al.iastate.edu has the SLALOM sources in various languages and other
things including the latest reported results in
pub/Slalom/Reports/CurrentReport.

                   ^ A  
                s / \ r                
               m /   \ c              
              h /     \ h            
             t /       \ i          
            i /         \ t        
           r /           \ e      
          o /             \ c    
         g /               \ t  
        l /                 \ u
       A /                   \ r
        <_____________________> e   
                Language
 
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks,comp.arch
From: goykhman_a@apollo.hp.com (Alex Goykhman)
Subject: Re: DEC ALPHA Performance Claims
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:15:27 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Nov11.235236.21699@oracle.us.oracle.com> dbmoore@us.oracle.com (Dennis Moore) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.053600.27768@ee.rochester.edu> rhode@ee.rochester.edu (Robert Rhode) writes:
>>I suspect the "world's Fastest" title has something to do with the
>>fact that Alpha has a nosebleed-fast clock (150 MHz sound right?) AND
>>low CPI.  With a GaAs implementation on the way, I think they can count
>>on holding the title for a while.
>
>I don't want to in any way imply that I know what I am talking about or that
>I have a favorite.  There are many issues in real-world performance (i.e.
>like how optimized for the platform are the applications you would use,
>what percentage of time is spent in the user interface versus in system
>services, etc.) that these benchmarks don't cover.
>
>That said, I watched the HP announcement, which happened later in the day
>after the DEC announcement, and HP claimed that their benchmarks were *all*
>faster than the DEC benchmarks (2-D, 3-D, shaded graphics; SPECfp, MFLOPS;
>integer performance; etc.)...

    I have the numbers in front of me, but I am not sure I can post them
    to the net.  Speaking of specmarks, DEC's high-end (200Mhz) appears to be 
    ~25% faster than that of HP's.  Not exactly an earth-shattering event, 
    especially considering that DEC did not release graphics-related 
    performance benchmarks for ALPHA...  In a word, I expected more from ALPHA.

    That said, SUN has the slowest workstations on the market, yet they ship
    more boxes than either of the above.

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: all opinions are mine.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks,comp.arch
From: jahonen@cs.joensuu.fi (Jarmo Ahonen)
Subject: Re: DEC ALPHA Performance Claims
Organization: University of Joensuu
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 07:47:05 GMT

lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay) writes:


>sharpe@adodem.enet.dec.com writes:
>	[ A list of the MFLOPS the Alphas get, inverting dense matrices.  ]
>	[ I have extended the list to give people a feel for the context. ]

>>
>>System                100x100 dp      1000x1000 dp
>>
>Compaq Deskpro 486/33	      1.4
>DEC 5000/200 (25 MHz R3000)   3.7
>Cray-1			     11		       31
>>DEC 3000/400S AXP           26.4              70.8
>>DEC 10000/610 AXP           42.5             111.6
>Convex C3810 (1 proc)	     44		      113
>Cray C90     (1 proc)	    387		      874

Numbers are always interesting, but I think that I might tell you
some of my experiences which always make me to calm down when I hear
excellent performance numbers. I have tried to run some in-house written
code on Suns, HPs (730, 750, and 710), and Convex C3840 and C3420
machines. With very small datasets those "real life" programs are
*very* fast on big HPs (actually more than 1.3  times the C3420 if
you run the program with only one processor on the C3420), but
with large datasets the C3420 provides more than twice the 
performance of HPs (C3420 with options that the program
is not parallerized and all processes fit into RAM, i.e.
no paging). 

The C3840 is, according to my experience and my codes, more than
twice and sometimes even more than thrice the performance of C3420
(remember, no parallerization). 

The suitability of the program for the architecture has, of course, 
an enormous effect on the real-life performance. For example the 
much used BP -package for neural-network simulations is dog slow
on Convex machines (at least relatively slow), and some FORTRAN
codes originally written for VAX are fairly slow on HPs and very
fast on Convex. 

For those reasons I have decided to run my programs on different machines
and then decide how fast they are. I'm eagerly waiting for the possibility
to rum my programs on Alpha-based machines.
I'm especially interested in the relation between the size of the dataset
(and the overall process size) and the relative performance.
Interesting times ahead, I believe :-).

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jarmo J. Ahonen
Computing Centre, Lappeenranta University of Technology, P.O.Box 20,
SF-53851 Lappeenranta, Finland. email: Jarmo.Ahonen@lut.fi
 
Xref: sparky comp.benchmarks:1665 comp.arch:10650
From: bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks,comp.arch
Subject: Re: DEC ALPHA Performance Claims
Date: 12 Nov 92 13:49:27 GMT
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA

In article <BxInrJ.Lr@metaflow.com> rschnapp@metaflow.com (Russ Schnapp) writes:
>In article <1992Nov10.150330.26923@ryn.mro4.dec.com>, bhandarkar@wrksys.enet.dec.com (Dileep Bhandarkar) writes:
>|> Our Alpha AXP products were announced today. The 200 MHz DEC 10000 Model 610 AXP
>|> achieves 184 SPECmark89, 106.5 SPECint92, 200.4 SPECfp92.
>|> 
>|> Is there a faster microprocessor system?
>|> 
>|> Dileep
>
>Impressive.  Are these actual or simulated results?
>-- 
 
I don't know. I do note that this system costs better than $300K.

I would like to see how it performs compared to (say) the Cray YMP-EL,
whose base price is about $250K, especially on LARGE problems.
When I say large, I mean something like a 20K x 20K LINPACK, not these
dinky little 1K x 1K benchmarks.

Why is having a *micro*-processor so important? What really matters is
price/performance, although for really large problems (e.g. Cray YMP-C90 needed)
price isn't so important.
--
Bob Silverman
These are my opinions and not MITRE's.
Mitre Corporation, Bedford, MA 01730
"You can lead a horse's ass to knowledge, but you can't make him think"
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: jdooley@urbana.mcd.mot.com (John Dooley)
Subject: Re: SPEC benchmark
Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Urbana Design Center
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:25:47 GMT

bwolen+@CS.CMU.EDU (Po-Jen Yang) writes:
>-- 
>Hi!  I am looking for SPEC suite.  Can anyone tell me where I
>can ftp a copy?
>Thanks
>Bwolen

>ps.  please reply to bwolen@cs.cmu.edu

You can't ftp it. (Or at least you shouldn't be able to!)  You must
purchase it from SPEC.  there are a number of suites available.  For
more information contact:

SPEC
c/o NCGA
Suite 200
2722 Merrilee Drive
Fairfax, VA 22031-4499
(703) 698-9600, ext. 318

-- 
John F. Dooley                   jdooley@urbana.mcd.mot.com
(217) 384-8591                   ...uiucuxc!udc!jdooley
Motorola Urbana Design Center, 1101 E. University Ave. Urbana, IL 61801
             "These certainly aren't Motorola's opinions..."
Xref: sparky comp.benchmarks:1646 comp.arch.storage:758
From: zeke@fasttech.com (Bohdan Tashchuk)
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks,comp.arch.storage
Subject: Re: Disk performance issues, was IDE vs SCSI-2 using iozone
Date: 11 Nov 92 06:41:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: fasttech.1992Nov11.064154.17204
Organization: Fast Technology

In <1992Nov10.170022.21624@igor.tamri.com> jbass@igor.tamri.com (John Bass) writes:

>Given small transfers qualification, "Slight margin in speed" is highly
>debatable .... The ability to do read scheduling and write placement
>based upon knowing geometry and current head/spindle position allows for
>30%-700% better semi-random small file I/O with the right filesystem design.
>The SCSI abstraction hides this important performance information.

I don't understand what you're saying here.

All the new high performance IDE drives I've seen are zoned, and "hide" the
actual geometry. Perhaps there's a way in IDE to ask the drive for the true
geometry, but my understanding is that SCSI allows this as well.

How is IDE better?
From: rschnapp@metaflow.com (Russ Schnapp)
Subject: Re: DEC ALPHA Performance Claims
Organization: Metaflow Technologies Inc.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 20:04:31 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.150330.26923@ryn.mro4.dec.com>, bhandarkar@wrksys.enet.dec.com (Dileep Bhandarkar) writes:
|> Our Alpha AXP products were announced today. The 200 MHz DEC 10000 Model 610 AXP
|> achieves 184 SPECmark89, 106.5 SPECint92, 200.4 SPECfp92.
|> 
|> Is there a faster microprocessor system?
|> 
|> Dileep

Impressive.  Are these actual or simulated results?
-- 

...Russ Schnapp
BIX: rschnapp           Email: uunet!metaflow!rschnapp or rschnapp@metaflow.com
Metaflow Technologies   Voice: 619/452-6608x230;  FAX: 619/452-0401
La Jolla, California    Unless otw specified, I`m speaking only for myself!
Xref: sparky comp.benchmarks:1654 comp.arch:10624
From: lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay)
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks,comp.arch
Subject: Re: DEC ALPHA Performance Claims
Date: 11 Nov 92 19:57:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.BxKI38.DM7.2
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon


sharpe@adodem.enet.dec.com writes:
	[ A list of the MFLOPS the Alphas get, inverting dense matrices.  ]
	[ I have extended the list to give people a feel for the context. ]

>
>System                100x100 dp      1000x1000 dp
>
Compaq Deskpro 486/33	      1.4
DEC 5000/200 (25 MHz R3000)   3.7
Cray-1			     11		       31
>DEC 3000/400S AXP           26.4              70.8
>DEC 10000/610 AXP           42.5             111.6
Convex C3810 (1 proc)	     44		      113
Cray C90     (1 proc)	    387		      874


So, the desktop Alpha is more than twice a Cray-1, and 7-8% of a C90.
Of course, this comparison is unfair: both the C90 and AXP have
virtues that the Linpack benchmark doesn't measure.  However, Linpack
is *the* benchmark which has been run on all the big parallel
machines, so these numbers are relevant to the parallel machine that
Cray is building out of Alpha chips.
-- 
Don		D.C.Lindsay 	Carnegie Mellon Computer Science
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: lhall@csfb1.fir.fbc.com (Lawrence Hall)
Subject: RE: Nees source of X-Stone benchmark
Reply-To: uunet!csfb1!lhall
Organization: First Boston Corporation
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 14:52:06 GMT

[ Hello people,
[ 
[ I still haven't received a response to my original post asking
[ for the source of the X-Stone benchmark.  
[ 
[ Where is the source of the X-Stone benchmark?
[ If it's proprietary, who sells it?
[ 
[ Thanks ahead of time,
[ 
[ 
[ David Munoz
[ dgm1626@boeing.com


There is a system called 'xbench' which seems similar to 'x11perf' but gives
it's output in 'xstones'.  It waas written by Claus Gittinger at Siemans in
Munich.  I got it from the UUNET archive, I do not know where else it might 
be available, but perhaps just knowing the right name will help you.


" " " Lawrence

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawrence E. Hall
First Boston Corp.
5 World Trade Center 9th Floor                    uunet!csfb1!phantom!lhall
NYC, NY  10048                                    lhall@csfb1.fir.fbc.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Secretary will disavow all knowledge. 
This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds.
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: ggeorge@bilbo.encore.com (Greg George)
Subject: ZD CPU Benchmark
Organization: Encore Computer Corp.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:35:51 GMT

Can someone please post where I can find the Ziff-Davis CPU
benchmark that is used in their magazines? They use these
tests for PC-Magazine and Computer Shopper. I looked around,
but don't know the name of what I am looking for...

thanks!

greg
From: eugene@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
Subject: [l/m 3/23/92] Linpack			(9/28)	c.be FAQ
Keywords: who, what, where, when, why, how
Date: 9 Nov 92 12:25:09 GMT
Reply-To: eugene@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Organization: NAS Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA

9	Linpack					<This panel>
10
11	NIST source and .orgs
12	Measurement Environments
13	SLALOM
14
15	12 Ways to Fool the Masses with Benchmarks
16	SPEC
17	Benchmark invalidation methods
18
19	WPI Benchmark
20	Equivalence
21	TPC
22
23
24
25	Ridiculously short benchmarks
26	Other miscellaneous benchmarks
27
28	References
1	Introduction to FAQ chain and netiquette
2	Benchmarking Concepts
3	PERFECT
4
5	Performance Metrics
6	Temporary scaffold of New FAQ material
7	Music to benchmark by
8	Benchmark types

The LINPACK benchmark is a very simple LU decomposition of a dense linear
system (Gaussian elimination) by Jack Dongarra the developer of the
LINPACK library and the netlib numerical software server.

Ref: Dongarra's article in CACM on Netlib.
And ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News and SIGNUM Newsletter.

Advantages:
Simple fairly portable FORTRAN.  One of the shorter benchamrks.
It is small enough to be carried on disk or in Jack's laptop without
consuming too much porting time.
A good attempt at experiment control, has stringent execution requirements.

Dongarra also records the compiler options used to invoke the Fortran
compilers.  Record keeping is good.  Reports are quickly available
electronically and published with some frequency in Supercomputing Review.

Disadvantages:
Diminishing parallelism during the decomposition (as in all Gaussian
elimination).  It is perhaps too simple.  Execution time is on the shorter
side.  It cannot characterize less numeric applications.

NETLIB benchmark index (Linpack benchmark)
netlib@ornl.gov
	send index from benchmark
includes linpack (100x100,300x300,1000x1000).

What is interesting about these sizes is that they are not
the powers of 2 which characterize many benchmarks.  Powers of 2
can bias in favor of some architectures and bias against other
architectures.

                   ^ A  
                s / \ r                
               m /   \ c              
              h /     \ h            
             t /       \ i          
            i /         \ t        
           r /           \ e      
          o /             \ c    
         g /               \ t  
        l /                 \ u
       A /                   \ r
        <_____________________> e   
                Language
 
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: mr804353@cs.nthu.edu.tw (mr804353)
Subject: how to run livermore
Organization: National Tsing Hua University (HsinChu)
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 16:15:57 GMT

  I want to know how to run livermore. Is there anyone could help me ?

  For example :
    
     To run "lloops", it need tow parameters : "-p", "-t". How to

  specify these parameters. And what is the meanning of its result.

     Another executable file is "baseline", how to use it "?

  Thanks!
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks,comp.arch
From: sharpe@adodem.enet.dec.com
Subject: Re: DEC ALPHA Performance Claims
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 19:51:31 GMT


In article <BxJ47t.K65.2@cs.cmu.edu>, lindsay+@cs.cmu.edu (Donald Lindsay) writes...
> 
>zapantis@uvphys.phys.UVic.CA writes:
>>How does the SPECfp92 rating relates to Mflops? Is it a one-to-one 
>>relationship?
>>If not, have you rated the Alpha systems( all of them!) in Mflops yet?
>>care to publish the rating?
> 
>There are lots of ways to measure MFLOPS, and they all give different
>answers. Which one are you requesting?
> 
>At a guess, you're asking for Linpack MFLOPS. This correlates well
>with *part* of the SPECfp92 test suite. What you would really like is
>a copy of the "performance brief" which DEC would typically be
>publishing about now. I expect it will give the Alpha's speed on each
>individual member of the SPEC suite, plus descriptions.
>-- 
>Don		D.C.Lindsay 	Carnegie Mellon Computer Science

From my copy of EB-N0104-51 "Alpha AXP Server Family Performance Brief - 
OpenVMS", Page 17,

System                100x100 dp      1000x1000 dp

DEC 3000/400S AXP           26.4              70.8
DEC 3000/500S AXP           30.2              79.9
DEC 4000/610 AXP            36.3              86.4
DEC 7000/610 AXP            38.6             102.1
DEC 10000/610 AXP           42.5             111.6

I don't think I have made any typos.

Dileep will know the reasons for this or that of course :-)

Regards
Richard Sharpe
These opinions be mine, Digital has its own!
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: eugene@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Subject: [l/m 3/17/92] music to benchmark by	(7/28)	c.be FAQ
Keywords: who, what, where, when, why, how
Organization: NAS Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 92 12:25:09 GMT
Reply-To: eugene@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)

7	Music to benchmark by					<This panel>
8	Benchmark types
9	Linpack
10
11	NIST source and .orgs
12	Measurement Environments
13	SLALOM
14
15	12 Ways to Fool the Masses with Benchmarks
16	SPEC
17	Benchmark invalidation methods
18
19	WPI Benchmark
20	Equivalence
21	TPC
22
23
24
25	Ridiculously short benchmarks
26	Other miscellaneous benchmarks
27
28	References
1	Introduction to the FAQ chain and netiquette
2
3	PERFECT
4
5	Performance Metrics
6

Benchmarking takes time.  Might as well listen to something useful.
Hey, engineers and scientists need some general education requirements and
to see the generally inteconnectedness of computing to the rest of the
world.

The Photographer by Philip Glass.
[Also "How to Get away with Second Degree Murder."]

Einstein at the Beach by Philip Glass.

"Democratic Process"
"Cowboy Lips"
"Art For Art's Sake" 
all off the "The Bobs" album on Kaleidoscope Records "K-18"
(P.O. box O, El Cerrito, CA, 94530)
[Excellent!  You are RIGHT!  SIGGRAPH 1984 as a good example]
jason@cs.utexas.edu

Dmitri Shostakovich
Aram Khachaturian
Sergei Prokofiev

as well as major cello concerti throughout the ages.  Paul Chihara's work
before he started writing for movies (if you can find it) is also good.
 
Or, if you're benchmarking a 16-processor Cray Y-MP C90, Chopin's Minute Waltz.

                   ^ A  
                s / \ r                
               m /   \ c              
              h /     \ h            
             t /       \ i          
            i /         \ t        
           r /           \ e      
          o /             \ c    
         g /               \ t  
        l /                 \ u
       A /                   \ r
        <_____________________> e   
                Language
 
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
From: eugene@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)
Subject: [l/m 3/17/92] Measurement environments		(12/28) c.be FAQ
Keywords: who, what, where, when, why, how
Organization: NAS Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 12:25:19 GMT
Reply-To: eugene@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Eugene N. Miya)

12	Measurement environments			<This panel>
13	SLALOM
14
15	12 Ways to Fool the Masses with Benchmarks
16	SPEC
17	Benchmark invalidation methods
18
19	WPI Benchmark
20	Equivalence
21	TPC
22
23
24
25	Ridiculously short benchmarks
26	Other miscellaneous benchmarks
27
28	References
1	Introduction to FAQ chain and netiquette
2
3	PERFECT
4
5	Performance Metrics
6	Temporary scaffold of New FAQ material
7	Music to benchmark by
8	Benchmark types
9	Linpack
10
11	NIST source and .orgs

Benchmarking environments
Taxonomy described by: A, B, C, D, E
Examples:
	A Cray Y-MP or better with integrated hardware performance monitor
	B Cray-2, Convex C-1/C-2...
	C VAX-11/780, IBM PC, IBM 370-class
	D Apple II, Timex Sinclair
	E Incomplete hardware, chip, module, board-level

An A environment should have state of the art hardware and
software to aid benchmarking.  Hardware should be minimally or non-intrusive.
This category should change with time.  The SS-1 should have a
more programmable HPM, this would lower the Y-MP down into
a B environment (can stay A if no other HPM type hardware becomes
predominant).  This is akin to high-precision Cesium clocks.

A B environment is a "good" environment to do benchmarking.
It has as a minimal, a near cycle-time clock, profiling software,
etc.  The environment at this level or higher may also be more hostile
for measurement.  Good performance is likely to be an issue, so the
compilers will have good optimizers.

A C environment is an "average" benchmarking environment.
This is just typical: a 60 or 100 Hz clock.  Some profiling software.

A D environment is a difficult environment to do benchmarking.
This environment may not have a clock or software to help the poor
benchmarker.  Timing by wrist watch or maybe oscilliscope.
Software? What software?

An E environment:
Another difficult environment to do benchmarking.  It might have software.
It might be an incomplete computer: a processing using of a larger
multiprocessor: it touches on the issue of composition.

If dealing with a simulator:
there maybe an F category for simulated timing.

                   ^ A  
                s / \ r                
               m /   \ c              
              h /     \ h            
             t /       \ i          
            i /         \ t        
           r /           \ e      
          o /             \ c    
         g /               \ t  
        l /                 \ u
       A /                   \ r
        <_____________________> e   
                Language
 
Xref: sparky comp.benchmarks:1635 comp.arch:10586
From: rf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns)
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks,comp.arch
Subject: Re: DEC ALPHA Performance Claims
Date: 10 Nov 92 17:46:42 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK

In article <1992Nov10.150330.26923@ryn.mro4.dec.com>, bhandarkar@wrksys.enet.dec.com (Dileep Bhandarkar) writes:
|> Our Alpha AXP products were announced today. The 200 MHz DEC 10000 Model 610 AXP
|> achieves 184 SPECmark89, 106.5 SPECint92, 200.4 SPECfp92.

Thanks, Dileep.  Numbers _have_ to be better than marketing-speak.
What company in their right minds _really_ wants to be associated in
the public mind with the Guiness book of records?

|> Is there a faster microprocessor system?

Presumably not today - but tomorrow's another story  :-)
--
Robin (come back John Drummond) Fairbairns       rf@cl.cam.ac.uk
U of Cambridge Computer Lab, Pembroke St, Cambridge  CB2 3QG, UK
"They had twelve years to lay in wait for us" - Bush supporter on Nov 4
Xref: sparky comp.benchmarks:1658 comp.arch:10634