Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 7780267
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 1, 20262026-06-01T18:50:44+00:00 2026-06-01T18:50:44+00:00

How can I confirm that a host is NUMA-aware? The Oracle doc says that

  • 0

How can I confirm that a host is NUMA-aware? The Oracle doc says that NUMA-awareness starts at kernel 2.6.19, but the NUMA man page says that it was introduced with 2.6.14. I’d like to be sure that a Java process started with -XX:+UseNUMA is actually taking advantage of something.

Checking for the numa_maps, I see that I have them:

# find /proc -name numa_maps
/proc/1/task/1/numa_maps
/proc/1/numa_maps
/proc/2/task/2/numa_maps
/proc/2/numa_maps
/proc/3/task/3/numa_maps

Though my kernel is behind what Oracle states:

# uname -sr
Linux 2.6.18-92.el5

I’m currently using 64-bit jdk1.6.0_29 on RHEL5.1.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-01T18:50:46+00:00Added an answer on June 1, 2026 at 6:50 pm

    The presence of those /proc files indicates that your linux kernel is numa-aware. Don’t concern yourself too much comparing version numbers, as, particularly with Oracle / RHEL kernels, the vendors port/backport many features without keeping the version string “up to date”.

    Other ways of testing the same thing:

    $ grep NUMA=y /boot/config-`uname -r`
    CONFIG_NUMA=y
    CONFIG_K8_NUMA=y
    CONFIG_X86_64_ACPI_NUMA=y
    CONFIG_ACPI_NUMA=y
    
    $ numactl --hardware
    available: 2 nodes (0-1)
    node 0 size: 18156 MB
    node 0 free: 9053 MB
    node 1 size: 18180 MB
    node 1 free: 6853 MB
    node distances:
    node   0   1
      0:  10  20
      1:  20  10
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Can anyone confirm that after changing the Apple Push Certificate to follow the new
Can anybody confirm or deny that I can modify default styles provided by StyleCop
I have installed Xdebug, and I can confirm from phpinfo() that it is correctly
I installed the exception notification plugin from http://github.com/rails/exception_notification/tree/master I can confirm that my ActionMailer
I know that this question have been asked several times. But I can't get
OK I can confirm that the session is active. and I can confirm that
Can anyone confirm or deny that it is possible to set an IP address
Just wondering if any Firebird users can confirm that batched queries is not a
I can use the jquery .data attribute and an alert confirms that it worked,
Is there any body can confirm the description here is true? My experience is

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.