Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 09:33:34 -0500 From: Coleman Kane <cokane@FreeBSD.org> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Colin Percival <cperciva@FreeBSD.org>, Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/amd64/amd64 mp_machdep.c src/sys/i386/i386 mp_machdep.c Message-ID: <4738643E.6030403@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20071112035910.GA58802@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> References: <200711081945.lA8JjKcW080540@repoman.freebsd.org> <47337724.9040108@FreeBSD.org> <47337940.6040909@root.org> <47340B74.9070004@freebsd.org> <4734B13C.6050008@root.org> <4735008D.7030600@FreeBSD.org> <473667FF.2010005@freebsd.org> <20071112035910.GA58802@lor.one-eyed-alien.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brooks Davis wrote: > On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 06:25:03PM -0800, Colin Percival wrote: > >> Maxim Sobolev wrote: >> >>> For what it is worth I think Nate has the correct point. We should not >>> force this setting upon each and every user if it can realistically >>> affect only 0.0001% of our userbase. >>> >> We're not forcing anything -- it's configurable via loader.conf. All >> we're talking about is changing the default value. >> >> >>> By the way, I wonder how sun4v (aka Niagara) fares in this respect. As >>> long as I know, they use similar concept, when 8 physical cores can run >>> 32 threads. Should we disable it by default there as well? ;-) >>> >> I haven't seen any experiments done on sun4v, but I'm less concerned about >> it since I believe sun4v boxes are used more often for large computing jobs >> rather than for interactive logins with many untrusted users. Of course, >> if/when we have scheduler support for keeping different users on separate >> cores, this should be applied to sun4v as well. >> > > Actually, webhosting is probably the most common use of sun4v systems. > As such, I'd expect that virtual hosting with large numbers of untrusted > users running code on the same machine to be fairly common. > > -- Brooks > I second this. As a person who actually participated in their "Try and you don't have to buy" program, they pitched the system as basically tuned for a LAMP server (I guess that's FAMP for us, heh). Reading reviews and tech docs, the platform seems pretty tuned to that workload. -- Coleman Kane
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4738643E.6030403>