On 11/19/12 18:59, Poul Dige wrote: >>>>> Fra: Alex Peshkoff [mailto:peshk...@mail.ru] >>>>> >>>>> On 11/13/12 18:18, Poul Dige wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I could put a screen dump here of the Windows 2008R2/63 task >>>>>> manager >>>>> with AMD Opteron 6274, 2x16 core running FB2.5.1 SC/32 bit (due to >>>>> some 32 bit UDF). I don't know if you are interested at a gaze. We >>>>> see exactly the same kind of usage, 8 cores are in use and 24 are >>>>> more or >>> less doing nothing. >>>>>> However, the cores in use are not maxed out - so it COULD be >>>>>> something >>>>> with power management that the OS doesn't want to activate more >>>>> CPU's than necessary. I can't tell about that for sure. >>>>> Is it SC or CS? >>>> Hi Alex, >>>> >>>> it is Super Classic. >>>> >>> Let me pay your attention that in initially described case use of >>> classic made all cores loaded. How does your server behave with classic? >> Hi Alex, >> >> It is a very important production server and I can't find a good way to make >> tests on it by switching to classic. Thing is, the connections are very short >> lived, so it is a nice feature that the threads are spawn very quickly by >> Firebird. I have seen another, similar server (32 cores Win2k8R2) with FB2.1 >> CS which seems to distribute load evenly, so I guess the problem lies in >> thread handling - not if FB but in Windows itself. >> >> I will try to install an update for Windows as it seems to be a well known >> problem with Windows 7/2008R2 vs AMD Bulldozer architecture, so the >> following hotfix may just be a solution (there are two hotfixes, the other >> one >> is referred to in the article): >> >> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2646060 >> >> I will re-post once we have had opportunity to update the server, which will >> probably not be until the weekend. >> > I installed the above mentioned hotfix from MS (toghether with the > prerequisit KB2645594) this past weekend. Today I see: > - exactly the same. > 55 threads (according to task manager) in FB 2.5.1.26351 SC (Super Classic) > spread over only 8 of the 32 cores on the Win2008R2 SP1 server (see hw specs > above). The cores aren't max'ed out, so at least in princip there is an > excuse for not firing up the remaining 24 cores. But, somehow I'd be more > happy to see an equal load on all cores.
Ahh - they are not full loaded? Probably I did not notice that fact before, sorry. In that case I suppose windows does the best for your performance - keeping less cores active lets them run at higher frequency (if I understand correctly how does your CPU work). > In other words - the hotfix didn't change anything noticably. > > Does FB decide anything regarding on which cores to run, or is it entirely a > Windows decision? I imagine the latter, but of course we have the "affinity" > parameter in the config file for super server installations, so at least it > is possible to influence choice of processor core. > > Are there any suggestions what I should try to do next? We have actually 2 > similar servers, both running 2.5.1SC (for now). The other server COULD be > equipped with CS instead, if that would make a lot of sence as a trial. Even > SS, as it primarily serves a lot of different databases with only a few > connections on each. > > Your call, Alex :) If 8 cores are not 100% loaded, this becomes more windows + amd rather than firebird issue. I give up. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
