3 ms·
Metajack mention power usage with parallelization briefly here[0], but doesn't provide the data. [0] https://youtu.be/7q9vIMXSTzc?t=35m https://youtu.be/7q9vIM
by lkbm 9y ago
Metajack mention power usage with parallelization briefly here[0], but doesn't provide the data.
[0] https://youtu.be/7q9vIMXSTzc?t=35m https://youtu.be/7q9vIMXSTzc?t=35m (2015)
- taeric 9y agoTo be clear, the reasoning is sound on this argument. I'm skeptical due to it never having delivered data, though. :( I want it to be true. I expect that someone should be able to show this with data. I've never seen it done, though.
- noch 9y agoYou can collect much of this data for yourself on a GNU Linux system by using the cgroups feature of the Linux kernel which is more powerful than nice https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/cgroup-v1/cgroups.txt https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/cgroup-v1/cgroups.t... . Using the various CPU* options, you can turn on CPUAccounting, pin a given process and its children/threads to a range of CPUs, place CPUQuotas and so forth. There's a lot of power and granularity there. I know, anecdotally, that devops/sysadmin folk use this to also audit and test energy consumption of processes over time. (Certain popular PID 1 programs have a run tool that allows you to easily, dynamically change and audit process resource usage.) My typical use case, for instance, is auditing and managing various Emacs' processes lifetimes while running potentially racy elisp code.
- taeric 9y agoI know the data can be gathered. Could go even more direct and measure power usage of the computer before and after the upgrade. It would be nice if everyone pushing some of these would collect some data for their claims, though. Especially if any of them have better setups (read: more than the single machine I have).