[chucky_z]

I've used `tuned` a lot. It's really extremely good for personal machines/workstations, and really okay for servers. In my case I'm almost 50/50 with it in professional cases, where 50% of the time I had a real good time with it, and 50% of the time I turned it off and used startup scripts (like cloud-init per-boot and whatnot).

Overall, I'd say give it a shot as it can be really powerful and I do actually like it. Don't be afraid to go 'no, I know how to do this better, myself' and turn it off though.

[bcrl]

I disable it whenever setting up a new system. It gets irq bindings for networking wrong every single time, and moves irqs around in ways that defeats the whole point of having per CPU queues. Not sure why that behaviour is enabled by default as it makes no sense.

[worthless-trash]

Please lodge a bug because I seem to think the same way but lack the larger deployment experience to explain how to do it more generally than my tiny use case.

[bcrl]

It's easier to uninstall it. There's nothing good that tuned has ever done for me.

FYI: messing with irq bindings for per-cpu queues of nics has been a bug for at least 16 years depending on the nic. FYI: Intel launched the 82599 back in 2009.

Clueless software developers should not be messing with kernel settings like irq bindings. Software that does that is not worth my time.

[cinntaile]

Complaining here won't improve the situation, filing a bug might.

[bcrl]

Again, I don't use it, so I'm not going to file bugs against it. My post is simply providing relevant context for other readers here to understand what the limitations of the software referenced in this post. In no world are technically competent folks under an obligation to teach other people how to do things right. Doubly so when the software is paid for by a large multinational corporation that has the resources to do the job right.

[malicka]

No obligation, obviously, no one argues that. The issue is tone.

> Clueless software developers should not be messing with kernel settings like irq bindings. Software that does that is not worth my time.

Come on, man. If you don’t want to help, just don’t respond. If you want to warn someone against something, just be bare-minimum polite. It’s easy.

[ahoka]

We used to call them script kiddies. Running stuff without understanding what's happening and why.

[markhahn]

What did you accomplish with it?

Another answer talks about saving 40W. Why not? But it's not much in a normal power-cost environment.

[chucky_z]

I did the reverse, I needed something to keep CPUs pegged at 100% power all the time, and for some reason the boxes I was using at the time kept going 'no no it's ok I need to save power,' but that lead to really inconsistent performance. Tuned, in that environment, 'just worked' after I wrote a custom profile.

There was another issue I was able to fix with it in AWS, but I legitimately can't recall what it is.