3 ms·
By typical I imagined adoption within commonly-deployed TSDBs like Prometheus, InfluxDB, etc. GB/GH are actually ideal targets for my code: both architectures
by ashtonsix 1y ago
By typical I imagined adoption within commonly-deployed TSDBs like Prometheus, InfluxDB, etc.
GB/GH are actually ideal targets for my code: both architectures integrate Neoverse V2 cores, the same core I developed for. They are superchips with 144/72 CPU cores respectively.
The perf numbers I shared are for one core, so multiply the numbers I gave by 144/72 to get expected throughput on GB/GH. As you (apparently?) have access to this hardware I'd sincerely appreciate if you could benchmark my code there and share the results.
- _zoltan_ 1y agoGB is CPU+2xGPU. GH is readily available for anybody at 1.5 dollars per hour on lambda; GB is harder and we're just going to begin to experiment on it.
- ashtonsix 1y agoEach Grace CPU has multiple cores: https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/data-center/grace-cpu-superchip https://www.nvidia.com/en-gb/data-center/grace-cpu-superchip This superchip (might be different to whichever you're referring to) has 2 CPUs (144 cores): https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-grace-cpu-superchip-architecture-in-depth https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-grace-cpu-superchip...