Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Are distributed systems a completely independent concept compared to symmetric multiprocessing (since in distributed, we have individual memory/disk storage per CPU whereas in symmetric we have many CPU’s utilizing the same memory/disk storage)?
I wouldn’t say they are completely different concepts, because you can get a shared memory in distributed systems (using Distributed shared memory), and multiple processes running on the same machine don’t share their address space. So both environments can exists on both architectures, but with a cost. In general, shared memory is easier to program but harder to build (from the hardware point of view), and distributed systems are harder to program but easier to build.
So, the different concepts are actually shared memory and non-shared memory, at least from the programming point of view.