 |
 |
Ian Stokes-Rees <[log in to unmask]> writes: > What advantage do you get by saying there is a second processor which > you only use for maintenance operataions? Couldn't you just run a > additional process on the one real processor? Then you'd get contention for disk I/O, network I/O, memory bandwidth and the shared parts of the physical CPU. Whether you'd get a speed-up in the end depends on the application. Some applications would actually run slower. On the other hand, there's always a number of system processes running in parallel with the application - syslogd, pbs_mom, what have you. Using hyperthreading to let them run concurrently with the application should be a (slight) win. I don't have any hard figures on that, though. -- Leif Nixon Systems expert ------------------------------------------------------------ National Supercomputer Centre Linkoping University ------------------------------------------------------------