On 3/21/06, Dario Lopez-Kästen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tino Wildenhain said the following on 2006-03-21 14:51:
>
> > Otoh, I have yet to see the figures showing the CPU afinity
> > buys you anything in reality. We know the GIL, thats for sure
> > but I never saw a measureable difference binding a process
> > to a CPU (which is also highly depending on the OS scheduler)
> >
>
> for us, it makes all the difference between "zope sucks, why do we
> bother with this non-sense, non-standard, butt-slow appserver, and use
> Java or PHP instead" and "nice, zope based solutions are really nice,
> not only feature wise, but also speedy. And they are clusterable too, neat!"
>
> /dario
>
Dario,
Do you have any kind of comparison numbers of using CPU affinity
vs not for your particular case? Also, are you using ZEO or not? It's
not that I don't believe you when you say it matters a lot for you. I
do believe you. Like Tino, I'm just generally interested in how much
it matters in measurable terms. I can imagine there are a number of
factors determining how much it matters, like Zope app/workload as
well as the underlying hardware architecture (how big of a penalty is
it to synchronize cache pages between CPUs) and the OS CPU scheduler
as Tino mentioned.
Jeff D
p.s. I agree with the rest of your sentiments about newbie bashing.
Unfortunately, it seems to be a popular past time among some of the
l33ts on a bunch of the lists I monitor these days.
_______________________________________________
Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
