From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 18 19:49:33 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C467C106564A for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:49:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from sippysoft.com (gk1.360sip.com [72.236.70.240]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B2998FC1A for ; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:49:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [192.168.0.36] ([204.244.149.125]) (authenticated bits=0) by sippysoft.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m2IJnVHN048951 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:49:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <47E01CC9.9040504@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:49:29 -0700 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Sippy Software, Inc. User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri References: <694675.30163.qm@web33708.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <694675.30163.qm@web33708.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Current Subject: Re: Speed Step and powerd for servers status? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:49:33 -0000 Abdullah Ibn Hamad Al-Marri wrote: > Hey, > > > I would like to use powerd and speed step for my servers, and make sure it will use the MAX CPU if needed then go to idle mode to save the power. > > Any recommendation? It's questionable whether or not it will have positive effect on the server: The combination of processor-frequency scaling and idle-power states provides a somewhat surprising result. On almost all modern hardware, if there is code to run, then it is more power efficient to run the processor at full speed. This "race to idle" concept stems from the power consumption of an idle processor being much lower than an active processor, even if running at a lower speed. The overall power consumption will be less if the processor spends a short time at full speed and then falls back to idle, rather than spending twice as long being active at a lower frequency. Full text is here: http://www.acmqueue.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=513 -Maxim