Re: [Fwd: HTT/SMP servers instability on 5.3-STABLE]
On Friday 10 December 2004 19:57, Colin J. Raven wrote: On Dec 10, Toomas Aas launched this into the bitstream: Colin J. Raven wrote: On Dec 10, Toomas Aas launched this into the bitstream: For more than a month now, I've been running a Dual Xeon 2000 system (IBM eServer xSeries 225) with 5.3-RC2 and later upgraded to 5.3-RELEASE and I have no problems at all. Hyperthreading is disabled in BIOS, ACPI is enabled. Excuse me for jumping into this thread but could you elaborate as to why you have Nyperthreading disabled? I'm afraid I can't give you any good technical reasons. I simply think of HTT as Intel marketing blurb, meant to make you feel like you are getting two CPUs for the price of one. Well, actually it's still only one CPU. I've been running another single Xeon 2.4 box for more than a year. Initially, I ran several months with HTT enabled. Then I ran several months with HTT disabled. I didn't really notice any performance difference. Well thanks for sharing those observations. Until I read what you said I *assumed* that there was a performance difference with HTT enabled. The specs seem to show that there *is* a theoretical difference, yet clearly according to your observations there just isn't any difference of earth shaking proportions. Isn't the point of HTT that a CPU holds several threads from the *same* process. So if your software isn't multithreaded, there's no benifit. UNIX software tends to fork single-threaded process, rather than create new threads, so it benefits from SMP, but not HTT. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Fwd: HTT/SMP servers instability on 5.3-STABLE]
Hi, I have a Dual Xeon 2.4 and a Dual Xeon 2.8 servers running with HyperThreading, ACPI, and SMP enabled. The 2.8 server won't stand for more than 5 days without crashing, and the 2.4 server was up 30 days crashed, now was up 12 days, and crashed. I didn't have a debugging kernel, I'll be building one when the datacenter reboots the server. I also don't have any panic messages.. I have, however, a few questions: - machdep.cpu_idle_hlt - I've seen a lot on google about this sysctl, but still don't fully understand it. What does this sysctl really changes? - HyperThreading - Do I really have a performance increase with HTT turned on? I've heard it can penalize performance because the scheduler isn't optimized for logical CPUs. Does having HTT enabled impacts the stability of the system? - ACPI - I'll be disabling ACPI along with HTT to see if the server doesn't crash for awhile. Is ACPI on 5.3-STABLE (around November 1st, it was pre-release) still a problem? Last but not the least, my 5.3-STABLE version is from a few days before the release. Since I had created a few jails by then, I didn't upgrade the system to use the -RELEASE. Was there any last-standing problem a few days before the release that could be causing my instability problems? Please share some common dual processor system knowledge, perhaps I'm missing something really obvious and making these servers unstable. Regards, Hugo ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HTT/SMP servers instability on 5.3-STABLE]
Hi, I have a Dual Xeon 2.4 and a Dual Xeon 2.8 servers running with HyperThreading, ACPI, and SMP enabled. The 2.8 server won't stand for more than 5 days without crashing, and the 2.4 server was up 30 days crashed, now was up 12 days, and crashed. I didn't have a debugging kernel, I'll be building one when the datacenter reboots the server. I also don't have any panic messages.. I have, however, a few questions: - machdep.cpu_idle_hlt - I've seen a lot on google about this sysctl, but still don't fully understand it. What does this sysctl really changes? - HyperThreading - Do I really have a performance increase with HTT turned on? I've heard it can penalize performance because the scheduler isn't optimized for logical CPUs. Does having HTT enabled impacts the stability of the system? - ACPI - I'll be disabling ACPI along with HTT to see if the server doesn't crash for awhile. Is ACPI on 5.3-STABLE (around November 1st, it was pre-release) still a problem? Last but not the least, my 5.3-STABLE version is from a few days before the release. Since I had created a few jails by then, I didn't upgrade the system to use the -RELEASE. Was there any last-standing problem a few days before the release that could be causing my instability problems? Please share some common dual processor system knowledge, perhaps I'm missing something really obvious and making these servers unstable. Regards, Hugo ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Fwd: HTT/SMP servers instability on 5.3-STABLE]
On Dec 10, Toomas Aas launched this into the bitstream: Colin J. Raven wrote: On Dec 10, Toomas Aas launched this into the bitstream: For more than a month now, I've been running a Dual Xeon 2000 system (IBM eServer xSeries 225) with 5.3-RC2 and later upgraded to 5.3-RELEASE and I have no problems at all. Hyperthreading is disabled in BIOS, ACPI is enabled. Excuse me for jumping into this thread but could you elaborate as to why you have Nyperthreading disabled? I'm afraid I can't give you any good technical reasons. I simply think of HTT as Intel marketing blurb, meant to make you feel like you are getting two CPUs for the price of one. Well, actually it's still only one CPU. I've been running another single Xeon 2.4 box for more than a year. Initially, I ran several months with HTT enabled. Then I ran several months with HTT disabled. I didn't really notice any performance difference. Well thanks for sharing those observations. Until I read what you said I *assumed* that there was a performance difference with HTT enabled. The specs seem to show that there *is* a theoretical difference, yet clearly according to your observations there just isn't any difference of earth shaking proportions. Much appreciated! Regards, -Colin -- Colin J. Raven NetBSD on a Cobalt Qube2 - http://www.NetBSD.org - Fri Dec 10 19:56:00 UTC 2004 7:56PM up 4:09, 5 users, load averages: 1.11, 1.16, 1.16 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Fwd: HTT/SMP servers instability on 5.3-STABLE]
On Dec 10, Lucas Holt launched this into the bitstream: Well thanks for sharing those observations. Until I read what you said I *assumed* that there was a performance difference with HTT enabled. The specs seem to show that there *is* a theoretical difference, yet clearly according to your observations there just isn't any difference of earth shaking proportions. I've got a dual xeon 2.0 ghz workstation. I've tried running with and without HTT enabled on it. My observations were that it seemed to help slightly with certain tasks but in general degraded system performance. For example, if i build a world to upgrade the OS it takes at least 30 seconds longer with HTT enabled. I tried it multiple times to verify it. I even tried it with different values for the j flag. (3 4 5 and 6) Similarly, if i run it in windows with HTT enabled I noticed that windows was peppy but it was a disaster during gaming. Of course that makes sense as most of my games are not designed for multiple cpus. (enemy territory, quake 3, Doom 3, etc) I also realize i could play some of them in fbsd, except my radeon 9600 xt isn't supported for 3d acceleration! This is *most* surprising but extremely useful information, many thanks for taking the time to impart first hand experiences. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Fwd: HTT/SMP servers instability on 5.3-STABLE]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please share some common dual processor system knowledge, perhaps I'm missing something really obvious and making these servers unstable. For more than a month now, I've been running a Dual Xeon 2000 system (IBM eServer xSeries 225) with 5.3-RC2 and later upgraded to 5.3-RELEASE and I have no problems at all. Hyperthreading is disabled in BIOS, ACPI is enabled. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Fwd: HTT/SMP servers instability on 5.3-STABLE]
On Dec 10, Toomas Aas launched this into the bitstream: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please share some common dual processor system knowledge, perhaps I'm missing something really obvious and making these servers unstable. For more than a month now, I've been running a Dual Xeon 2000 system (IBM eServer xSeries 225) with 5.3-RC2 and later upgraded to 5.3-RELEASE and I have no problems at all. Hyperthreading is disabled in BIOS, ACPI is enabled. Excuse me for jumping into this thread but could you elaborate as to why you have Nyperthreading disabled? We're about to run a dual cpu box ourselves so this is highly relevant (as well as just plain 'ol fascinating!!) Regards, -Colin -- Colin J. Raven NetBSD on a Cobalt Qube2 - http://www.NetBSD.org - Fri Dec 10 19:27:00 UTC 2004 7:27PM up 3:40, 5 users, load averages: 1.27, 1.18, 1.17 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Fwd: HTT/SMP servers instability on 5.3-STABLE]
Colin J. Raven wrote: On Dec 10, Toomas Aas launched this into the bitstream: For more than a month now, I've been running a Dual Xeon 2000 system (IBM eServer xSeries 225) with 5.3-RC2 and later upgraded to 5.3-RELEASE and I have no problems at all. Hyperthreading is disabled in BIOS, ACPI is enabled. Excuse me for jumping into this thread but could you elaborate as to why you have Nyperthreading disabled? I'm afraid I can't give you any good technical reasons. I simply think of HTT as Intel marketing blurb, meant to make you feel like you are getting two CPUs for the price of one. Well, actually it's still only one CPU. I've been running another single Xeon 2.4 box for more than a year. Initially, I ran several months with HTT enabled. Then I ran several months with HTT disabled. I didn't really notice any performance difference. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Fwd: HTT/SMP servers instability on 5.3-STABLE]
Well thanks for sharing those observations. Until I read what you said I *assumed* that there was a performance difference with HTT enabled. The specs seem to show that there *is* a theoretical difference, yet clearly according to your observations there just isn't any difference of earth shaking proportions. Much appreciated! Regards, -Colin -- Colin J. Raven NetBSD on a Cobalt Qube2 - http://www.NetBSD.org - Fri Dec 10 19:56:00 UTC 2004 7:56PM up 4:09, 5 users, load averages: 1.11, 1.16, 1.16 ___ I've got a dual xeon 2.0 ghz workstation. I've tried running with and without HTT enabled on it. My observations were that it seemed to help slightly with certain tasks but in general degraded system performance. For example, if i build a world to upgrade the OS it takes at least 30 seconds longer with HTT enabled. I tried it multiple times to verify it. I even tried it with different values for the j flag. (3 4 5 and 6) Similarly, if i run it in windows with HTT enabled I noticed that windows was peppy but it was a disaster during gaming. Of course that makes sense as most of my games are not designed for multiple cpus. (enemy territory, quake 3, Doom 3, etc) I also realize i could play some of them in fbsd, except my radeon 9600 xt isn't supported for 3d acceleration! Lucas Holt [EMAIL PROTECTED] FoolishGames.com (Jewel Fan Site) JustJournal.com (Free blogging) ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
