lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/5] cpuset memory spread basic implementation

* Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote:

> On Tuesday 07 February 2006 13:30, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > you are a bit biased towards low-latency NUMA setups i guess (read:
> > Opterons) :-)
>
> Well they are the vast majority of NUMA systems Linux runs on.
>
> And there are more than just Opterons, e.g. IBM Summit. And even the
> majority of Altixes are not _that_ big.
>
> Of course we need to deal somehow with the big systems, but for the
> good defaults the smaller systems are more important.

i'm not sure i understand your point. You said that for small systems
with a low NUMA factor it doesnt really matter where the pagecache is
placed. I mostly agree with that. And since placement makes no
difference there, we can freely shape things for the systems where it
does make a difference. It will probably make a small win on smaller
systems too, as a bonus. Ok?
> Big systems tend to have capable administrators who are willing to
> tweak them. But that's rarely the case with the small systems. So I
> think as long as the big system can be somehow made to work with
> special configuration and ignoring corner cases that's fine. But for
> the low NUMA systems it should perform as well as possibly out of the
> box.

i also mentioned software-based clusters in the previous mail, so it's
not only about big systems. Caching attributes are very much relevant
there. Tightly integrated clusters can be considered NUMA systems with a
NUMA factor of 1000 or so (or worse).

> > Obviously with a low NUMA factor, we dont have to deal
> > with memory access assymetries all that much.
>
> That is why I proposed "nearby policy". It can turn a system with a
> large NUMA factor into a system with a small NUMA factor.

well, would the "nearby policy" make a difference on the small systems?
Small systems (to me) are just a flat and symmetric hierarchy of nodes -
the next step from SMP. So there's really just two distances: local to
the node, and one level of 'alien'. Or do you include systems in this
category that have bigger assymetries?

Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-02-07 14:02    [W:0.287 / U:0.180 seconds]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site