1988
DOI: 10.1109/2.57
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeling multicomputer systems with PARET

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

1989
1989
1999
1999

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In contrast to PARET [6] that concentrates on the lowlevel packet communication, MADCAPP focuses only on the application-level messages. This eliminates the task of processing other packets corresponding to routing table maintenance and retransmission due to loss or damage of messages that are mixed with the packets corresponding to the application-level messages.…”
Section: Madcappmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In contrast to PARET [6] that concentrates on the lowlevel packet communication, MADCAPP focuses only on the application-level messages. This eliminates the task of processing other packets corresponding to routing table maintenance and retransmission due to loss or damage of messages that are mixed with the packets corresponding to the application-level messages.…”
Section: Madcappmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Previous research in the area of modeling and displaying the activity of a parallel processor system includes PARET [6], PIE [7], POKER [8,9], PAW [10], and SIMON [11,12]. PARET is a modeling tool wherein the concurrently executable entities of user programs, operating systems, and hardware configurations are modeled and studied.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…PARET-PARET (Parallel Architecture Research and Evaluation Tool) is an interactive graphical tool developed by Bell Laboratories [Nichols and Edmark 1988]. PARET models multicomputer system performance using data flow graphs to represent processes, links, and buffers.…”
Section: Iv-25mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The most significant distinctions occur in the scalability of specifications. Poker (4) and PARET, (14) for example, are typify most systems by providing no scalability: the user explicitly creates, annotates, and interconnects program nodes and he draws a new graph for each change in program size. Polylith, ~15) CODE, (12~ and SPECTRAL (16) each provide limited scalability.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%