Re: [Discuss] I think my server is running out of something
My experience is that when too many services are loaded onto the same machine, it eventually gets too complicated to manage properly, and ultimately it starts exhibiting bizarre glitches that are nearly impossible to understand in enough detail to fix. From what you describe in your original message, it sounds like your server may be reaching that level of complexity. The Efika MX Smarttop is supposed to draw only 5W. With the addition of a low power USB drive, it may be able to handle your web and postfix services, and it should still use a lot less than 140W. On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 1:13 AM, David Kramer da...@thekramers.net wrote: On 03/18/2012 12:45 AM, John Abreau wrote: Is it completely impossible to deploy multiple servers instead of trying to mash everything together onto a single machine? In my home network, I have a CentOS server that just does firewall/DNS/ DHCP, a second server for web/mail/fileserver, and a third server for backups. That's in addition to my desktops, laptops, and tablet. I'm not running MythTV, but if I were to deploy MythTV, I'd use a dedicated server that would do nothing but MythTV. Of course it's possible to do so. But up until a few hours ago, it was working completely fine, rarely going below 85% idle, and burning about 140 watts according to my Killowat. That's pretty damn awesome. Two servers would mean almost twice the electricity draw with no real benefit. Oh, and the server has an IR tranceiver on it for changing channels on my cable box. The MythTV capture card (PVR-350) does hardware MPEG encryption, so MythTV isn't really dragging things down as much as you would think processor-wise, though I'm sure it pounds the sata bus, though. I only have one card and it's SD, so it's not like I'm trying to write out multiple HD files at the same time. All the MythTV recordings go on drives not used for anything else. Postfix sees a lot of mail (I usually get around 200 spam messages a day, most of which is caught by SpamAssassin). The web server is hosting about 6 domains, some of which go to one of the two wiki engines I have on my server, but maybe it handles 100 hits a day. So why do I need multiple servers if my CPU cores are mostly idle? ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux Unix OLD GnuPG KeyID: D5C7B5D9 / Email: abre...@gmail.com OLD GnuPG FP: 72 FB 39 4F 3C 3B D6 5B E0 C8 5A 6E F1 2C BE 99 2011 PGP KeyID: 32A492D8 / Email: abre...@gmail.com 2011 PGP FP: 7834 AEC2 EFA3 565C A4B6 9BA4 0ACB AD85 32A4 92D8 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] I think my server is running out of something
I had a similar problem with an older machine. What is the power rating of your power supply? Quick overview of ground zero: Home-built server/firewall/mail server/web server/MythTV back end/makes coffee. Motherboard: Abit IP35 Pro with Intel Core2Duo E6750 @ 2.66GHz eth0 -- cablemodem eth1 -- intranet 6 sata ports on motherboard (JBOD, not RAID) 1 sata drive for root 4 sata drives for MythTV recordings 1 sata DVD-RW I decided to add another 1TB drive for MythTV recordings, so I bought a WD Caviar Black sata drive. I plug it into the 6th and last sata port and power back up, and the server won't boot. Unplug the new drive, and it boots. I got an idea of trying to disconnect the DVD-RW drive and plug the new drive back into sata port 6, and the server boots. Spooky. So once again I unhook the new drive, plug in the DVD-RW drive again, and it boots. Then I discovered that eth1 was dark. No signal, lights aren't lighting up. So my server can get to the internet, but the rest of the house was SOL. I reboot, and then eth1 works, but eth0 is dark, so I can get to my server from my other computers, but nothing can get out to the internet. I reboot AGAIN and finally both ethernet jacks are live. I backed away slowly thinking clean thoughts. Again, this is several reboots with no changes to hardware getting different results. Current status is that the system is back up with all the original hard drives working, and both ethernet ports working, but my brand spankin new hard drive is staring at me longingly waiting to be deployed. I have a theory that my server is running out of something (interrupts? DMAs?), and the luck of the draw is determining what devices get what they need. I can't think of another scenario where devices would randomly work or not at boot, and adding a device disables others. What do you think? What can I look at? What can I try? Thanks in advance. Side note: I stick labels on all my drives with the install date. Apparently some of my MythTV drives have been spinning almost continuously since 2007. That is impressive. And scary. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] I think my server is running out of something
On 03/18/2012 12:02 AM, David Kramer wrote: Quick overview of ground zero: Home-built server/firewall/mail server/web server/MythTV back end/makes coffee. Motherboard: Abit IP35 Pro with Intel Core2Duo E6750 @ 2.66GHz eth0 -- cablemodem eth1 -- intranet 6 sata ports on motherboard (JBOD, not RAID) 1 sata drive for root 4 sata drives for MythTV recordings 1 sata DVD-RW I decided to add another 1TB drive for MythTV recordings, so I bought a WD Caviar Black sata drive. I plug it into the 6th and last sata port and power back up, and the server won't boot. Unplug the new drive, and it boots. I got an idea of trying to disconnect the DVD-RW drive and plug the new drive back into sata port 6, and the server boots. Spooky. So once again I unhook the new drive, plug in the DVD-RW drive again, and it boots. Then I discovered that eth1 was dark. No signal, lights aren't lighting up. So my server can get to the internet, but the rest of the house was SOL. I reboot, and then eth1 works, but eth0 is dark, so I can get to my server from my other computers, but nothing can get out to the internet. I reboot AGAIN and finally both ethernet jacks are live. I backed away slowly thinking clean thoughts. Again, this is several reboots with no changes to hardware getting different results. Current status is that the system is back up with all the original hard drives working, and both ethernet ports working, but my brand spankin new hard drive is staring at me longingly waiting to be deployed. I have a theory that my server is running out of something (interrupts? DMAs?), and the luck of the draw is determining what devices get what they need. I can't think of another scenario where devices would randomly work or not at boot, and adding a device disables others. What do you think? What can I look at? What can I try? Thanks in advance. Side note: I stick labels on all my drives with the install date. Apparently some of my MythTV drives have been spinning almost continuously since 2007. That is impressive. And scary. ___ Look at your power supply. That won't explain the dark eth ports, but you might be marginally pulling too much power. Boot issues: I had a similar issue. last summer when I went on a cruise I took my HDs out, and when I put them back the system dis not boot. I manually reordered them and it booted fine. BTW: JABR has a full rack at home :-) -- Jerry Feldman g...@blu.org Boston Linux and Unix PGP key id:3BC1EB90 PGP Key fingerprint: 49E2 C52A FC5A A31F 8D66 C0AF 7CEA 30FC 3BC1 EB90 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[Discuss] Next AMD FX-8120 update
I finally got my AMD FX-8120 8 core system and have migrated to it. My old system, an AMD Athlon Dual Core, 8G RAM is now powered off waiting for a new job. My initial problem was a bad motherboard and my biggest obstacle to migration was wife and family and the responsibilities there of. So, quick summary: AMD FX-8120 8 core CPU 16 Gig RAM 1TB Boot drive (new) 1.5TB Data drive (removed from previous machine) Ubuntu 12.04 My first impression was that it is not much faster than the old Dual Core Athlon when running a single task, but that turned out to be false. It does seem faster than the previous machine. I only have anecdotal information. Does anyone know of a good Linux benchmark? At work we have IBM servers using XEON Westmere processors, running similar clock speeds, the inexpensive AMD calculated SHA1 hashes faster than the XEON. I was surprised. The big win, of course, is multiple processes and threads. With the extra RAM, I am able to create good sized virtual machines with multiple CPUs. The processor itself is interesting. It isn't quite 8 true processors, but it isn't quite as useless as Intel's Hyperthreaded cores either. I will need to find time time to really test it. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] Next AMD FX-8120 update
On 03/18/2012 08:34 AM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote: I finally got my AMD FX-8120 8 core system and have migrated to it. My old system, an AMD Athlon Dual Core, 8G RAM is now powered off waiting for a new job. My initial problem was a bad motherboard and my biggest obstacle to migration was wife and family and the responsibilities there of. So, quick summary: AMD FX-8120 8 core CPU 16 Gig RAM 1TB Boot drive (new) 1.5TB Data drive (removed from previous machine) Ubuntu 12.04 My first impression was that it is not much faster than the old Dual Core Athlon when running a single task, but that turned out to be false. It does seem faster than the previous machine. I only have anecdotal information. Does anyone know of a good Linux benchmark? At work we have IBM servers using XEON Westmere processors, running similar clock speeds, the inexpensive AMD calculated SHA1 hashes faster than the XEON. I was surprised. The big win, of course, is multiple processes and threads. With the extra RAM, I am able to create good sized virtual machines with multiple CPUs. The processor itself is interesting. It isn't quite 8 true processors, but it isn't quite as useless as Intel's Hyperthreaded cores either. I will need to find time time to really test it. Generally, we used to turn off hyperthreading. Hyperthreading gives you extra pseudo cores, but they are not real cores. -- Jerry Feldman g...@blu.org Boston Linux and Unix PGP key id:3BC1EB90 PGP Key fingerprint: 49E2 C52A FC5A A31F 8D66 C0AF 7CEA 30FC 3BC1 EB90 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[Discuss] Boston Linux and Unix InstallFest XLIII Saturday March 24, 2012
Boston Linux Installfest XLIII When: Saturday March 24, 2012 from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm Where: MIT Building E-51, Room 061 2 Amherst St, Cambridge Plenty of free parking in front of the building. http://mitiq.mit.edu/mitiq/directions_%20parkinge51.htm What you need to bring: Your computer, monitor, power strips and your Linux distributions. We do have copies of some distributions. In general we have expertise with most distros, but if you need special expertise, please email the BLU discussion list in advance. Today, most distros are using Live CDs that you can try out and then install. Additionally, CD images can be pushed onto USB sticks using various USB creators. COST: It's free! However, we DO have expenses, and contributions are welcome. Please consider contributing $25 per machine. Our volunteers will help you to install Linux on your own system. While Linux runs on most systems, some systems do have configurations and hardware that may not be supported. Please consult the following web pages for hardware compatibility. While we prefer you to bring your own distros, our volunteers will normally have Linux Howto Pages: http://tldp.org/HOWTO/HOWTO-INDEX/howtos.html Linux Frequently Asked Questions: http://tldp.org/docs.html#faq Additionally, there are forums and listservs for most distros. Generally our volunteers have sets of the latest Fedora, SuSE and Ubuntu distributions: * Fedora - http://fedora.redhat.com (Fedora 16 DVD/Live CD/USB) * Open SuSE - http://opensuse.org (OpenSuSE 12.1 - DVD/Live CD/) * Ubuntu - http://www.ubuntu.com (Orderly Owl 11.10 CD/USB - I'll probably have 12.04 beta available) We generally have them on local drives and can burn CDs/DVDs and USBs.Since there are many variants of these distros, we advise you to bring an empty USB stick with sufficient memory to hold one of the distros. LiveCD images required under 1GB, full DVD images for Fedora require about 4GB, and OpenSuSE needs 8GB. I usually have some USBs prepared. In addition, you can run Linux on your Windows PC through a virtual machine manager, such as Virtualbox. You can install this in your Windows machine and run Linux as a guest OS, or install it in your Linux machine and run Windows as a guest. VirtualBox 4.0.8. (http://www.virtualbox.org.) is free and is available for Linux, Windows XP and Windows Vista. Additionally, there are some VMWare clients that are also free for Windows. Please refer to the BLU website (http://www.blu.org) for further information and directions. Parking is free and available in front of the building on Amherst St. Enter the building, and take the elevator to your left down 1 floor. Room 061 is opposite the elevator. Lunch is generously sponsored By Ron Thibeau and John Ross, Bluefin Technical Services. -- Jerry Feldman g...@blu.org Boston Linux and Unix user group http://www.blu.org PGP key id: 537C5846 PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846 ___ Announce mailing list annou...@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/announce ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] Next AMD FX-8120 update
Here is an output from sysbench: FX-8120: markw@snoopy:~$ sysbench --test=cpu --cpu-max-prime=2 --num-threads=8 run sysbench 0.4.12: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark Running the test with following options: Number of threads: 8 Doing CPU performance benchmark Threads started! Done. Maximum prime number checked in CPU test: 2 Test execution summary: total time: 3.2178s total number of events: 1 total time taken by event execution: 25.7120 per-request statistics: min: 2.23ms avg: 2.57ms max: 4.94ms approx. 95 percentile: 2.71ms Threads fairness: events (avg/stddev): 1250./1.87 execution time (avg/stddev): 3.2140/0.00 AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 925 Processor markw@huey:~$ sysbench --test=cpu --cpu-max-prime=2 --num-threads=4 run sysbench 0.4.10: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark Running the test with following options: Number of threads: 4 Doing CPU performance benchmark Threads started! Done. Maximum prime number checked in CPU test: 2 Test execution summary: total time: 8.3527s total number of events: 1 total time taken by event execution: 33.4005 per-request statistics: min: 3.28ms avg: 3.34ms max: 10.62ms approx. 95 percentile: 3.35ms Threads fairness: events (avg/stddev): 2500./35.81 execution time (avg/stddev): 8.3501/0.00 I finally got my AMD FX-8120 8 core system and have migrated to it. My old system, an AMD Athlon Dual Core, 8G RAM is now powered off waiting for a new job. My initial problem was a bad motherboard and my biggest obstacle to migration was wife and family and the responsibilities there of. So, quick summary: AMD FX-8120 8 core CPU 16 Gig RAM 1TB Boot drive (new) 1.5TB Data drive (removed from previous machine) Ubuntu 12.04 My first impression was that it is not much faster than the old Dual Core Athlon when running a single task, but that turned out to be false. It does seem faster than the previous machine. I only have anecdotal information. Does anyone know of a good Linux benchmark? At work we have IBM servers using XEON Westmere processors, running similar clock speeds, the inexpensive AMD calculated SHA1 hashes faster than the XEON. I was surprised. The big win, of course, is multiple processes and threads. With the extra RAM, I am able to create good sized virtual machines with multiple CPUs. The processor itself is interesting. It isn't quite 8 true processors, but it isn't quite as useless as Intel's Hyperthreaded cores either. I will need to find time time to really test it. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] Next AMD FX-8120 update
On 03/18/2012 10:06 AM, ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote: Here is an output from sysbench: FX-8120: markw@snoopy:~$ sysbench --test=cpu --cpu-max-prime=2 --num-threads=8 run sysbench 0.4.12: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark Running the test with following options: Number of threads: 8 Doing CPU performance benchmark Threads started! Done. Maximum prime number checked in CPU test: 2 Test execution summary: total time: 3.2178s total number of events: 1 total time taken by event execution: 25.7120 per-request statistics: min: 2.23ms avg: 2.57ms max: 4.94ms approx. 95 percentile: 2.71ms Threads fairness: events (avg/stddev): 1250./1.87 execution time (avg/stddev): 3.2140/0.00 AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 925 Processor markw@huey:~$ sysbench --test=cpu --cpu-max-prime=2 --num-threads=4 run sysbench 0.4.10: multi-threaded system evaluation benchmark Running the test with following options: Number of threads: 4 Doing CPU performance benchmark Threads started! Done. Maximum prime number checked in CPU test: 2 Test execution summary: total time: 8.3527s total number of events: 1 total time taken by event execution: 33.4005 per-request statistics: min: 3.28ms avg: 3.34ms max: 10.62ms approx. 95 percentile: 3.35ms Threads fairness: events (avg/stddev): 2500./35.81 execution time (avg/stddev): 8.3501/0.00 I finally got my AMD FX-8120 8 core system and have migrated to it. My old system, an AMD Athlon Dual Core, 8G RAM is now powered off waiting for a new job. My initial problem was a bad motherboard and my biggest obstacle to migration was wife and family and the responsibilities there of. So, quick summary: AMD FX-8120 8 core CPU 16 Gig RAM 1TB Boot drive (new) 1.5TB Data drive (removed from previous machine) Ubuntu 12.04 My first impression was that it is not much faster than the old Dual Core Athlon when running a single task, but that turned out to be false. It does seem faster than the previous machine. I only have anecdotal information. Does anyone know of a good Linux benchmark? At work we have IBM servers using XEON Westmere processors, running similar clock speeds, the inexpensive AMD calculated SHA1 hashes faster than the XEON. I was surprised. The big win, of course, is multiple processes and threads. With the extra RAM, I am able to create good sized virtual machines with multiple CPUs. The processor itself is interesting. It isn't quite 8 true processors, but it isn't quite as useless as Intel's Hyperthreaded cores either. I will need to find time time to really test it. MArk, Can you run the same test (1 thread per real core) on the Xeons with hyperthreading turned off. -- Jerry Feldman g...@blu.org Boston Linux and Unix PGP key id:3BC1EB90 PGP Key fingerprint: 49E2 C52A FC5A A31F 8D66 C0AF 7CEA 30FC 3BC1 EB90 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] I think my server is running out of something
On 03/18/2012 07:37 AM, Jerry Feldman wrote: Boot issues: I had a similar issue. last summer when I went on a cruise I took my HDs out, and when I put them back the system dis not boot. I manually reordered them and it booted fine. It's a Silverstone Olympia OP640 650W, which should be plenty. It's possible that just the SATA rail is maxed out. Maybe I should try putting the drive in an external sata case for power but connect the sata cable from the motherboard to it as an experiment. Would anyone be willing to lend me one? I'll buy one if I have to but I wouldn't have any use for it past this test. BTW: JABR has a full rack at home :-) Let's keep the conversation clean ;) ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] Next AMD FX-8120 update
What you will typically find is that if your threads are CPU bound then you will see better performance over the long term with HT disabled. The reason is that the phantom CPUs that HT provides need to share cache and memory bandwidth and there is some extra switching overhead. The upshot is that if you have 1 CPU with 2 HT threads and 4 CPU-bound jobs to run, the total time to run all 4 jobs will be less with HT disabled. As an aside for anyone running a Condor pool, disabling HT is recommended for this reason. On the other hand, if you are not CPU-bound across all of your threads, or in environments where concurrency is more important than throughput, then HT may be a win. AMD's Bulldozer architecture has less resource contention than Intel's HT implementations (less overhead) but two threads on 1 core still have to share some resources and you will usually see results similar to what I described. --Rich P. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] Next AMD FX-8120 update
ma...@mohawksoft.com wrote: I finally got my AMD FX-8120 8 core system and have migrated to it. I see that Micro Center has this CPU on sale for $180 this week... Does anyone know of a good Linux benchmark? If you are more interested in comparing the new server vs. the old server, rather than against some common standard, then you'll get the most meaningful results by using some actual applications. So for example, Postfix or Apache or whatever. You'll need some synthetic data or a stressing tool to create a load. -Tom -- Tom Metro Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA Enterprise solutions through open source. Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/ ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] Next AMD FX-8120 update
On Mar 18, 2012, at 4:49 PM, Tom Metro wrote: example, Postfix or Apache or whatever. You'll need some synthetic data or a stressing tool to create a load. I like using HandBrake to do video encodes as a general benchmark. HandBrake will use as many threads as the system reports as usable and it mixes both CPU-bound and IO-bound threads. --Rich P. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] I think my server is running out of something
David Kramer wrote: Home-built server/firewall/mail server/web server/MythTV back end/makes coffee. Others covered this...I'll only add that a router appliance would provide a fairly cheap upgrade, hardly add any additional power usage, and improve your security, while offloading some of your server workload. 1 sata drive for root 4 sata drives for MythTV recordings 1 sata DVD-RW I decided to add another 1TB drive...the server won't boot. What exactly do you see when it fails to boot? It's a Silverstone Olympia OP640 650W, which should be plenty. It's possible that just the SATA rail is maxed out. I concur with the others that this sounds like a power supply issue, though 6 hard drives should not be excessive for a 650W supply. (I have as many or more drives on my MythTV server with something like a 450W supply.) But if the supply is optimized for running high powered graphics cards it may in fact be running out of current on the 12V line used by the drives. Maybe I should try putting the drive in an external sata case for power... That wold be a good test and possibly a permanent work around. For a quicker test that requires no additional equipment, try powering up the system with the new drive attached to the SATA poet, but the power connector detached, wait for the kernel boot messages to appear, and then power up the drive. Hard drives use a peak amount of power during startup, and this will stager the load among your drives. Then I discovered that eth1 was dark. I reboot AGAIN and finally both ethernet jacks are live. As others speculated, probably related to the power problems. What did you see from 'ifconfig'? Were the dark ports listed, but inactive, or absent entirely? You may have some udev problems with the hardware being recognized consistently. But if this only happens with the new drive attached, then unlikely to be anything but power. Apparently some of my MythTV drives have been spinning almost continuously since 2007. That is impressive. And scary. I have a set of 4 Seagate 320 GB drives in a RAID 5 that have been running inn my MythTV server since Fall 2006. :-) -Tom -- Tom Metro Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA Enterprise solutions through open source. Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/ ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] I think my server is running out of something
On Mar 18, 2012, at 5:14 PM, Tom Metro wrote: I concur with the others that this sounds like a power supply issue, though 6 hard drives should not be excessive for a 650W supply. (I have as many or more drives on my MythTV server with something like a 450W supply.) I'm running 4x2TB SATA + 1x250GB SATA on my N40L with a 150W PSU. I believe that Tom correct in his speculation about GPU drivers. That particular Silverstone model is designed to feed power to a high-end GPU, not to lots of disks. The quantity of disks combined with temperature-driven falloff could very well be leaving other parts of the system starved for power. --Rich P. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Discuss] Next AMD FX-8120 update
On 03/18/2012 12:02 PM, Richard Pieri wrote: What you will typically find is that if your threads are CPU bound then you will see better performance over the long term with HT disabled. The reason is that the phantom CPUs that HT provides need to share cache and memory bandwidth and there is some extra switching overhead. The upshot is that if you have 1 CPU with 2 HT threads and 4 CPU-bound jobs to run, the total time to run all 4 jobs will be less with HT disabled. As an aside for anyone running a Condor pool, disabling HT is recommended for this reason. On the other hand, if you are not CPU-bound across all of your threads, or in environments where concurrency is more important than throughput, then HT may be a win. AMD's Bulldozer architecture has less resource contention than Intel's HT implementations (less overhead) but two threads on 1 core still have to share some resources and you will usually see results similar to what I described. In Toronto they always turn off HT. I ran a quick test and found that the RiskWatch application runs better with no HT. There is certainly some benefit to HT under some circumstances. The problem isn't with hyperthreads per se' it is a problem with system schedulers not knowing the difference or how to use them. Hyperthreads are sort of a micro-NUMA environment. Sometimes, it is best to put a HT semi-core to sleep instead of using it because there is no appropriate job for it to run and running another job would affect its peer. One of the things I was concerned about the FX-8120 was the shared resources of the cores. So far it doesn't seem too bad. Even though core pairs share a numeric processor and some caching, they seem to schedule fairly well independently. So, like I said, they aren't truly full cores, but they don't seem similarly limited. -- Jerry Feldman g...@blu.org Boston Linux and Unix PGP key id:3BC1EB90 PGP Key fingerprint: 49E2 C52A FC5A A31F 8D66 C0AF 7CEA 30FC 3BC1 EB90 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
