Thanks for the reply. I am just playing around to understand this. On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 9:43 AM, JohnS <jses27 at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-09-24 at 08:57 -0400, Mag Gam wrote: >> I am playing around with irqbalance to tune my 8 core system so I came >> across this page, >> http://kb.fusionio.com/KB/a65/irqbalance-avoid-overloading-cpu-0-with-interrupt-requests.aspx >> >> Now, lets say I disable irqbalance which will stop my autobalance and >> I pin all of my interrupts to core 0 and pin eth0 and eth1 to core 1. >> My application is network and CPU hungry. I am planning to dedicate >> cpu 3 to 8 for the application using taskset. Is there any draw back >> to this? > --- > NO but be aware of what your doing as to not starve out Kernel Threads. > Whats the kernel? It want hurt to give them priority either. Gbit and > higher nics I would give them there own cpu. It may take quit a while > to come up with the optimal configuration though. > Example: > cpu0 app priority 60 - 99 no ionice is app dependent > cpu1 app > cpu2 eth0 > cpu3 eth1 > cpu4 fusionio > cpu5 fusionio > cpu6 kthreads > cpu7 kthreads, misc > > John > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >