cpu_cores does not work on amazon ec2 #205
Labels
No labels
bugfix
cleanup
discussion
documentation
doing
done
feature
improvement
packaging
Stale
testing
TODO
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: ungleich-public/cdist#205
Loading…
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Created by: lloyd
Yields incorrect results on some virtual machines. The results of this is
1
on an r3.xlarge instance, and I imagine for others too.The issue is all cores have a core id of 0. removing
uniq
fixes the problem. Is there a system where cores are reported more than once? if not, could you just simplify to:closed
Created by: telmich
Good point, dheule.
@lloyd what do you think about using your suggest version and create a new global explorer "cpu_cores_all" that includes cores based on hyperthreading?
Created by: dheule
Hello Nico,
My intention to cpu_cores was and is to reflect the real physical cores
(without hyperthreading for example).
What about to make an additional explorer for example "cpu" which don't
reflect the real cores or sockets,
means only count the number of available cpus.
This is what counting the "core id" without uniq meens.
Regrards, Daniel
2014-05-21 23:49 GMT+02:00 Nico Schottelius notifications@github.com:
Created by: dheule
Hello lloyd,
seems that amazone ec2 has some courious cpu architecture.
Normaly on linux, the "core id" is only the same if hyperthreads are
connected to the same physical core.
2014-05-21 11:09 GMT+02:00 Lloyd Hilaiel notifications@github.com:
Created by: telmich
Hey lloyd,
I think this will break with hyperthreading:
[13:10] artist:~% grep "core id" /proc/cpuinfo
core id : 0
core id : 0
core id : 1
core id : 1
[on my notebook]
Maybe we should change cpu_cores to the version without uniq, like you suggest and introduce another explorer "cpu_threads".
@dheule and @asteven what do you think about this change? In case we go for it, I'll make a minor version bump -> incompatible change.