Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 11:17:01 -0500 (EST) From: Kelly Yancey <kbyanc@posi.net> To: Jim Mercer <jim@reptiles.org> Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: current working SMP mboards? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.10002281036470.15151-100000@kronos.alcnet.com> In-Reply-To: <20000228103056.I606@reptiles.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 28 Feb 2000, Jim Mercer wrote: > i'm considering the following for 3.4-STABLE (or 4.0-RELEASE): > ASUS (P2B-DS or P2L97-DS) > 512M RAM > 1 x scsi drive for OS/applications > 5 x 9/18 gig U2W drives under vinum raid5 for data I cannot personally comment on your hardware setup, but I recall others on -smp indicating success with the ASUS SMP motherboards. > > my understanding of the SMP stuff is that if the application is not > multi-threaded, then SMP doesn't do much. > If the application is multi-threaded, currently SMP doesn't do much. FreeBSD has user-land threads and the smallest kernel schedulable entities are processes, not threads. > my theory was that with a dual processor, each incantation of the application > would fire up on alternating processors. Assuming each application is it's own process, then you would be utilizing both CPUs. > > is this correct? or is SMP effectively useless unless my application > (primarily postgresql) is multi-threaded. > Your scenario should work precisely because, at least under current versions of FreeBSD, SMP is most effective in non-multi-threaded applications. Kelly -- Kelly Yancey - kbyanc@posi.net - Richmond, VA Analyst / E-business Development, Bell Industries http://www.bellind.com/ Maintainer, BSD Driver Database http://www.posi.net/freebsd/drivers/ Coordinator, Team FreeBSD http://www.posi.net/freebsd/Team-FreeBSD/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.10002281036470.15151-100000>