Subject: Re: Midrange machine + NetBSD -- + NUMA.
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Marc Tooley <netbsdMLpostNO@spam.quake.ca>
Date: 02/14/2006 14:49:50
On Monday 13 February 2006 17:08, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> This configuration is similar to that of a number of TNF servers. It
> should work well.
Superb. I'm pretty stoked at getting NetBSD up on this machine and doing
some work on it.
> You might want to consider that the MegaRAID supports a battery
> backup module for its cache. In my experience these are usually well
> worth purchasing even if one thinks the system will never be used
> except when connected to a UPS -- you never know when someone will
> trip over the power cord.
For now, the machine is reserved for scratch/testing use and won't be
put into full-time duty as a server or other must-be-reliable machine.
> Not as far as I'm aware. What makes you think this?
Ah, I know why I've this impression now. I ran into the following limits
not too long ago:
... and had trouble with a process that wanted to exceed some X GB of
process memory, even after I added something like 3GB of additional
swap in my 1GB desktop machine.
Also, I saw posts like yours:
Thor: Can't lock even 4GB on system with 8GB RAM?
... so I guess my memory (haha) is a little suspect.
> One thing to consider may be that if you have the 8GB RAM as 8 1GB
> modules, you will want to reduce the memory bus clock to 333MHz (if
> the BIOS doesn't do so for you automatically). Current Opteron
> memory controllers can't reliably drive four 400MHz modules at once.
Yes, thank you. This is tremendously helpful: precisely what I'm going
to be doing.
I've been reading up a bit on Opteron's NUMA, and I learned that
attempting to allocate the nearest physical RAM to processes that
preferentially run on a specific CPU was something a few scattered
handfuls of people are working on for various OSes. That would be