On 9/22/2010 6:37 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
Unfortunately this can't be MFC'd to 7 as it would destroy the ABI for
existing klds.
Ah, ok, sorry, I did only check RELENG_7. Can we make it a kernel option
then?
Regards,
--
Maksym Sobolyev
Sippy Software, Inc.
Internet Telephony (VoIP) Experts
T/
On Wednesday, September 22, 2010 1:08:30 pm Curtis Penner wrote:
> MAXCPU at 32 has been good in the 32bit days. Soon there will be (if
> not already) systems that will have 16cores/socket or more, and
> motherboards that have 4 sockets or more. Combining this with
> hyper-threading, you have
2010/9/22 Curtis Penner :
> MAXCPU at 32 has been good in the 32bit days. Soon there will be (if not
> already) systems that will have 16cores/socket or more, and motherboards
> that have 4 sockets or more. Combining this with hyper-threading, you have
> gone significantly beyond the limits of fe
MAXCPU at 32 has been good in the 32bit days. Soon there will be (if
not already) systems that will have 16cores/socket or more, and
motherboards that have 4 sockets or more. Combining this with
hyper-threading, you have gone significantly beyond the limits of
feasible server.
Bumping the n
On Wednesday, September 22, 2010 6:36:56 am Maxim Sobolev wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any reason to keep MAXCPU at 16 in the default kernel config?
> There are quite few servers on the market today that have 24 or even 32
> physical cores. With hyper-threading this can even go as high as 48 or
>
2010/9/22 Maxim Sobolev :
> Hi,
>
> Is there any reason to keep MAXCPU at 16 in the default kernel config? There
> are quite few servers on the market today that have 24 or even 32 physical
> cores. With hyper-threading this can even go as high as 48 or 64 virtual
> cpus. People who buy such hardwa
Hi,
Is there any reason to keep MAXCPU at 16 in the default kernel config?
There are quite few servers on the market today that have 24 or even 32
physical cores. With hyper-threading this can even go as high as 48 or
64 virtual cpus. People who buy such hardware might get very
disappointed f
on 21/09/2010 19:16 Alan Cox said the following:
> Actually, I think that there is a middle ground between "per-cpu caches" and
> "directly from the VM" that we are missing. When I've looked at the default
> configuration of ZFS (without the extra UMA zones enabled), there is an
> incredible amoun
8 matches
Mail list logo