Re: best practice maximum number of OS processes
From: De DBA <dedba_at_tpg.com.au>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 09:25:17 +1000
Message-ID: <51B9035D.7090201_at_tpg.com.au>
No, that sounds quite silly to me. As an example, my workstation (admittedly Debian Squeeze 64bit, not Redhat, but otherwise quite comparable) runs currently 282 processes on only 2 cores. This provides perfect performance. Of the 282 processes, 133 are root (system) processes, providing various essential services. Restricting the OS to 8 * cores processes (=16 in my case) would make it impossible to run the OS, let alone user programs.
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 09:25:17 +1000
Message-ID: <51B9035D.7090201_at_tpg.com.au>
No, that sounds quite silly to me. As an example, my workstation (admittedly Debian Squeeze 64bit, not Redhat, but otherwise quite comparable) runs currently 282 processes on only 2 cores. This provides perfect performance. Of the 282 processes, 133 are root (system) processes, providing various essential services. Restricting the OS to 8 * cores processes (=16 in my case) would make it impossible to run the OS, let alone user programs.
Perhaps they refer to the run queue, rather than the total number of processes?
Hth,
Tony
On 13/06/13 08:35, Josh Collier wrote:
> Hi,
> I am trying to validate the following statement for red hat linux 64bit 5.4, 11.2.0.2:
>
> It is a best practice to limit the number of operating system processes to no more than 8 times the number of CPU cores
>
>
> Does this sound reasonable? This would mean on a 32 core system I would be limited to no more 256 processes to serve my queries. In a partitioned data warehouse.
>
> Thanks for your time,
>
> JoshC.
>
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Thu Jun 13 2013 - 01:25:17 CEST