Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Does someone have an example of jobs that become easier with 4 terabytes of local storage and thirty CPU cores? It seems to me the overhead of administrating these kinds of system would dwarf any benefit.

If you're doing any sort of graphics or video rendering, you eat up all the CPU, RAM and a lot of the disk that you can throw at it. Regular DV digital video takes up 12 GB per hour. Uncompressed 1080/24p HD video footage can take over 320 Gigs an hour. More here: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/howto/articles...

Video and graphics rendering are "embarrassingly parallel" problems, and will generally chew up any resources that you throw at them. Most semi-pro video editing/3d modeling programs have packages that let you throw up a render farm fairly quickly.



Why don't people say trivially parallel vs embarrassingly parallel? What is so embarrassing about an easily solvable problem?


Probably because, embarrassingly enough, they're implemented in a purely serial way and don't make use of parallel hardware.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: