Is this possible?

[Liam Proven]

On 3 October 2016 at 16:35, rikona <rikona at sonic.net> wrote:
>
> My hope is to do things in parallel. I work with a fair amount of
> data, and a large data run may take 12 hours. Sometimes I can split
> that and run it as multiple processes. While that is running, I may
> have multiple browsers, each with perhaps 50 or more tabs open. This
> load makes my current box unusably slow, swap is maxed out, and
> something very often crashes - I may lose several days of work. And
> there's email, editing of docs, making diagrams, etc, etc. Perhaps
> Intel can do one 12 hour job in 4 hours, but I still have lots going
> on during that 4 hours.


I'm ignoring all the pointless advocacy here.

If you have stability issues, you need to troubleshoot them properly.

You need to profile your workloads and find the bottlenecks.

And if it's background stuff and concerns with OSes struggling to
balance conflicting workloads then you should probably be looking at
VM solutions, and partitioning off the background  number-crunching
tasks.

Throwing CPU cores at the problem is inane and a pointless waste of
cash. Throwing slower cores is burning banknotes. And throwing slower
cores *when you're not even sure it's CPU-bound* is just stupid.

Sorry, but it is.
-- 
Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk • GMail/Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven
Skype/MSN: lproven at hotmail.com • LinkedIn/AIM/Yahoo: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)