On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:39 AM, J. Roeleveld <jo...@antarean.org> wrote: > On Sunday, December 16, 2012 01:52:46 PM Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: >> Am Samstag, 15. Dezember 2012, 20:57:24 schrieb J. Roeleveld: >> > Even on a system with only 2 sockets, it can be useful to have NUMA >> > available. >> >> or not, because it costs you performance. > > When does it cost performance? > In all situations?
It adds some additional logic to memory allocation (put an allocation near the process that uses it) and to process scheduling (keep the process near its memory, but bump it to a more distant idle core if necessary). In all honestly, it's not a performance loss you're likely to notice, unless you're so in need of squeezing out every spare cycle that you most definitely _have_ hardware where there are disconnected memory banks. I'm not convinced it's even measurable for us mundanes and our hardware. > >> And while the starting questions were not stupid this thread is overflowing >> with stupid answers. > > Matter of opinion... Indeed. -- :wq
