Advertisement

The Topsy project: a position paper

  • Peter Osmon
  • Tom Stiemerling
  • Tony Valsamidis
  • Andy Whitcroft
  • Tim Wilkinson
  • Nick Williams
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 605)

Abstract

This paper describes the current position of work on City University's Topsy project. Topsy is a new message passing multicomputer architecture. It comprises a fully Unix compatible distributed kernel, called Meshix, on top of a message based software system which in turn relies on new, high speed, communications hardware, Meshnet. A overview of the machine architecture and operating system is presented together with a discussion on the current implementation and further work.

Keywords

Shared Memory Message Passing League Table Virtual Memory Block Cache 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    System V Interface Definition, Issue 2. AT&T, 1986.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    T. Wilkinson, A. Whitcroft, P. Winterbottom, and P. Osmon, “The Meshnet multistage communications network,” Tech. Rep. TCU/CS/1991/23, City University Computer Science Department, May 1991.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Winterbottom and P. Osmon, “Topsy: an extensible UNIX multicomputer,” in Proceedings of UK IT90 Conference, (Southampton University), pp. 164–176, March 1990.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Winterbottom and T. Wilkinson, “MESHIX: a UNIX like operating system for distributed machines,” in UKUUG Summer Conference Proceedings, pp. 237–246, July 1990.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Rozier and L. Martins, Distributed Operating Systems: Theory and Practice, Nato ASI Series, vol. F28, ch. The Chorus distributed operating system: some design issues, pp. 261–287. Springer Verlag, 1987.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    N. Accetta, W. Bolosky, D. Golub, R. Rashid, A. Tevanian, and M. Young, “MACH: A new kernel foundation for UNIX development,” in USENIX Summer Conference, July 1986.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. J. Leffler, M. K. McKusick, M. J. Karels, and J. S. Quarterman, The Design and Implementation of the 4.3BSD UNIX Operating System. Addison Wesley, 1989.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. Stiemerling, A. Whitcroft, T. Wilkinson, and N. Williams, “Evaluating Meshix — a Unix compatible micro-kernel OS,” Tech. Rep., City University Computer Science Department, January 1992.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    F. Douglis, M. Kaashoek, and A. Tanenbaum, “A Comparison of Two Distributed Systems: Amoeba and Sprite,” Tech. Rep., Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit, February 1991.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. Ousterhout, A. Cherenson, M. Douglis, M. Nelson, and B. Welch, “The Sprite network operating system,” IEEE Computer, vol. 21, pp. 23–36, February 1988.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. Mullender, G. van Rossum, A. Tanenbaum, R. van Renesse, and H. van Staveren, “Amoeba: a distributed operating system for the 1990's,” IEEE Computer, pp. 44–53, June 1990.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. Pike, D. Presotto, K. Thompson, and H. Trickey, “Plan 9 from Bell Labs,” in UKUUG Summer Conference Proceedings, July 1990.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. Whitcroft, “The CBIC: Architectural support for message passing,” Tech. Rep., City University Computer Science Department, March 1992.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    B. Bershad, T. Anderson, E. Lazowska, and H. Levy, “Lightweight remote procedure call,” ACM Operating Systems Review, vol. 23, pp. 102–113, December 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    T. Stiemerling, T. Wilkinson, and A. Saulsbury, “Implementing DVSM on the Topsy multicomputer,” in Symposium on Experiences with Distributed Multiprocessor Systems III, March 1992.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. Nelson, B. Welch, and J. Ousterhout, “Caching in the Sprite Network File System,” ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, vol. 6, pp. 134–154, February 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    V. Srinivasan and J. Mogul, “Spritely NFS: Experiments with Cache Consistency Protocols,” in Proceedings of the 12th Symposium on Operating System Principles, pp. 45–57, December 1989.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    M. Kazar, O. Anderson, B. Leverett, V. Apostolides, B. Bottos, S. Chutani, C. Everhart, W. Mason, S. Tu, and R. Zayas, “DEcorum File System Architectural Overview,” in USENIX Summer Conference, pp. 151–163, June 1990.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    T. Wilkinson, T. Stiemerling, P. Osmon, A. Saulsbury, and P. Kelly, “Angel: a proposed multiprocessor operating system,” in European Workshops on Parallel Computing 92, March 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Osmon
    • 1
  • Tom Stiemerling
    • 1
  • Tony Valsamidis
    • 1
  • Andy Whitcroft
    • 1
  • Tim Wilkinson
    • 1
  • Nick Williams
    • 1
  1. 1.Systems Architecture Research Centre Department of Computer ScienceCity UniversityLondonUK

Personalised recommendations