Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC 2/2] Introduce sysctl(s) for the migration costs | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Date | Fri, 09 Feb 2018 18:50:09 +0100 |
| |
On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 12:33 -0500, Steven Sistare wrote: > On 2/9/2018 12:08 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > Shrug. It's bogus no mater what we do. Once Upon A Time, a cost > > number was generated via measurement, but the end result was just as > > bogus as a number pulled out of the ether. How much bandwidth you have > > when blasting data to/from wherever says nothing about misses you avoid > > vs those you generate. > > Yes, yes and yes. I cannot make the original tunable less bogus. Using a smaller > cost for closer caches still makes logical sense and is supported by the data.
You forgot to write "microscopic" before "data" :) I'm mostly agnostic about this, but don't like the yet more knobs that 99.99% won't touch.
-Mike
| |