|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Quick question.
I am sorry, but I do not make a theory - I just repors practical results. 2 CPU systems are much more stable than 1 CPU system, in my experience. You are free to find an explanatiion, if you want -:). > > On Wed, 4 Aug 2004, Paul G wrote: > > > the second cpu buys you time - it is unlikely you're going to be > > able to react in time on a busy single cpu box with a runaway > > process (it launches into a death sprial almost immediately), but > > you would usually have 10-15 mins on a dual cpu box at a minimum or > > maybe infinity if you enforce cpu affinity for apps that tend to > > misbehave. > > Why do you have 10-15 mins? If the application is multi-threaded and > has a reasonable workload, there are plenty of types of bugs that > will result in one spinning thread after the other, you need far > more than just 2 CPUs! Or maybe your application vendor has "at least > 10minutes between hitting bugs!" on it's feature list? ;) > > Really, what you to need do is (in the face of such buggy apps) is to > set per-task CPU time resource limits appropriate to how much > cpu-time a task needs and how much you can afford - be it a 1, 2 or n > CPU system. > > > paul > > regards, > -- > Paul Jakma [email protected] [email protected] Key ID: 64A2FF6A > Fortune: > I came to MIT to get an education for myself and a diploma for my mother.
|