X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	q=dns; s=default; b=qHTif8RKHIJEX+1Zugita5ornXtVJH+dkCADWjH/IIZ
	Kw1+V9lo/LmC84xT9kpQchC+J+WwW9qsiddRCHy1Bq5f96n8KASCo7fqESDNNchv
	qU+zVsqGeKojVHSsnZy67ndMBeDulU9eWyWvuFfnd53c7o9n6x/4UvqJ9LysXn4M
	=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject
	:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	s=default; bh=4l5cR4Ar1EAEGnz8myWdu0zVSZs=; b=EuRO1sDFBRH9/ZEQA
	ZsSQpfm99XlkTsTyLGuaSVCKMBsGL0sGkKauAFUjxYKjm2H8CzzI6+WP0zEp1auu
	S8kDv2rsWtHmVs/Xvi9wN/gBzC0WSQuMhD5UaBLBLBF7aagRjjHeCii8m9f0EA2W
	GfVctEiGluWwcnWI90M+l+2RxM=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO:	relay.sgi.com
Message-ID:	<55CA37A1.4030704@sgi.com>
Date:	Tue, 11 Aug 2015 12:57:53 -0500
From:	"Brian J. Johnson" <bjohnson AT sgi DOT com>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Somebody having access to a Windows machine with > 64 CPUs?
References:	<20150810160011 DOT GC13029 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <6E689F0D-F196-4D1B-B6FA-782A27AF936C AT etr-usa DOT com> <20150810165604 DOT GE13029 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <87lhdjrs54 DOT fsf AT Rainer DOT invalid>
In-Reply-To:	<87lhdjrs54.fsf@Rainer.invalid>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes

On 08/10/2015 12:05 PM, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen writes:
>> I was referring to Windows 7 because that's the first OS (including
>> it's 2008R2 server version) which supports more than 64 CPUs and the
>> OS calls required to use and fetch info on them,
>> GetLogicalProcessorInformationEx.
>
> I think the only practical use of this possibility might have been in
> the HPC space.  I don't know anybody running such a system, though.

In-memory databases also benefit from really large systems.  Lots of RAM 
requires lots of sockets, which bring along lots of cores.  Eg. 
http://www.sgi.com/company_info/newsroom/press_releases/2015/july/sap_hana.html

I believe KVM will let you define a VM with > 64 CPUs, and recent 
versions provide some control over the NUMA layout of the virtual 
sockets/cores/threads.  Maybe that will give you what you're looking 
for, Corinna.
-- 

						Brian J. Johnson

--------------------------------------------------------------------

   My statements are my own, are not authorized by SGI, and do not
   necessarily represent SGI’s positions.

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -