Re: Dell PowerEdge 8450
Mark Simmons <[email protected]> Mon, 01 Mar 2004 13:20:27 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.smp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Well, reading the paper on the new FreeBSD 5.0 ULE (sp?) scheduler, it seems as though they're treating HT CPUs as a form of NUMA for CPU affinity purposes. Whether that has any measurable benefit, or causes measurable problems, I don't know. The paper was presented at BSDCon '03 iirc, you can find it at Usenix.org. David Burren wrote: > "Toru Nishimura" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>His lab tested HT servers and concluded _the_ HT SMP Linux kernel >>implementation scales actually worse, at least no better, than >>plain SMP kernel. It sounded HT is rather waste of transistor >>and electricity. > > > My understanding is that HT can be beneficial if you have a model > where you can avoid having threads from separate processes running > on the same physical CPU. > > Given that this requires the use of multithreaded applications in > your performance critical path to get any advantage, and a scheduler > that distinguishes between virtual and physical CPUs, then without > both of those yes I'd agree it's a waste of time. > But I'm sure there's an application for it _somewhere_... ;) > > Does anyone know of a scheduler (in any OS) that is HT-aware in > this way? > __ > David Burren