Bill Davidsen wrote:
Roger Heflin wrote:
Ric Moore wrote:
On Sat, 2008-03-22 at 10:03 -0500, Roger Heflin wrote:
Ric Moore wrote:
On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 21:58 -0500, Roger Heflin wrote:
Brent Snow, Mr. wrote:
Hi All,
I am having a problem with a new Dell PowerEdge 1900
Server
running Fedora 8.
The System setup is as follows:
2 - Xeon E5310 (Quad-Core 1.6 GHz) processors
16 GB of RAM, I SATA 80 GB HDD.
Holy Smokes! 2 quad cores? That's 8 cores total(?) and 16 GIGS of
Ram??
My Gawd, not only am I jealous as all hell, I'm wondering what kinda
kernel are you running?? Any sort of stock kernel would roll over and
join the Choir Eternal.
Actually fairly normal kernels work just fine on the large boxes, I
have ran stock FC6 kernels up to 8 cpus/16 cores and up to 64GB of
ram with no issues.
Wouldn't you be running some sort of mini clustering setup?? Setup
right, it should really blow serious coal. Your problem might lie in
that direction. You might have training wheels on a Dodge Hemi. With a
machine like that, I could almost do without eating! <huge drooling
grins> Ric
Clustering setups are only needed when you have more than 1 machine,
having lots of cpus on a single machine is much easier than
clustering as you don't need have to worry about the networking, and
the memory can be shared easily between the cpus.
Huh, I wonder then why he's having problems. In the -OLD- days he'd be
rolling a new kernel. Is the stock kernel multi-cpu aware or does he
need a more specialized kernel, or is it the kernel at all?? That's
where I would be looking, fer sure. God, I want one like he's got.
<scratching strong itch> I always stay a couple of years behind. :) Ric
Hyperthreading has been around too long, and dual core has also been
around too long, so pretty much everyone ships with SMP on *NOW*.
And you are correct, several years ago, SMP was default off on a
number of distributions, so you almost always had to compile your own.
What you say is mostly correct, although some distributions did ship an
SMP kernel which you could boot. The one factor you didn't mention is
that some changes made in early 2.6 reduced the performance penalty for
running an SMP kernel on a uni. I don't remember exactly which, but
there's little justification for bothering now, since if you're out
after the last drop of performance you probably run SMP anyway.
The one exception might be someone on old grotty hardware, true uni and
slow to boot, where a percent or two would seem to matter.
Bill,
I started using dual socket machines when 2.2 was unstable, and 2.0 was *stable*
very few shipped anything SMP back then, it was a roll your own world, this was
pre-hyperthread (HT started at 1.8Ghz Xeons, the 1.26 and 1.44 P3 Xeons did not
have it).
But every machine we had was SMP simply because the second cpu typically gave us
a 50-70% speed increase on the application, but cost a lot less than 50% to pick
a SMP box over a Uni box, and that was counting using a SMP over a Uni kernel in
the machine.
Roger
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
