Re: Parallel Application Processing

Holger Baer wrote:

> It is also briefly covered here:
> http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/ask/f?p=4950:8:::::F4950_P8_DISPLAYID:10498431232211

Thanks! As usual, Tom has very interesting technical solutions.

> However, running 100's of them in parallel would mean you need to have the horse power
> to do so.

What I was trying to convey (badly) is that the design itself must be scalable for any number of parallel processes - not a hack that allows only two parallel processes for example. E.g. if this code is to be implemented on a massive Enterprise RAC, it must be able to scale accordingly.

> According to Cary Milsap (read Batch Queue discipline and Batch Queue
> and the magic of 2 available at hotsos.com after registration) you shouldn't
> run more jobs than 2 times the number of CPUs in parallel.

Holger, I will take that as a rule of thumb as it depends on whether the processes are CPU bound or not. Unix is capable of running 1000's of processes in parallel. Windows is capable of running 1000's of threads in parallel. It is the actual work done in those that governs just how many can be effectively run in parallel.

--
Billy