Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261750AbVANIuW (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jan 2005 03:50:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261746AbVANIuW (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jan 2005 03:50:22 -0500 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:49348 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261750AbVANIsm (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jan 2005 03:48:42 -0500 To: davids@webmaster.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: NUMA or not on dual Opteron References: From: Andi Kleen Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 09:48:42 +0100 In-Reply-To: (David Schwartz's message of "Fri, 14 Jan 2005 00:04:32 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 524 Lines: 13 "David Schwartz" writes: > > 2) How much overhead does the NUMA code add? On most of the benchmarks I've > seen, the answer is a lot, so much that the memory access would have to be Hmm? What benchmarks were that? That doesn't match my experience. -Andi - 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/