From oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Sun Jun 6 02:17:30 2004 Return-Path: Received: from air189.startdedicated.com (root@localhost) by orafaq.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i567HFD03226 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2004 02:17:25 -0500 X-ClientAddr: 206.53.239.180 Received: from turing.freelists.org (freelists-180.iquest.net [206.53.239.180]) by air189.startdedicated.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i567Gt603205 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2004 02:17:15 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 19CBE72C254; Sun, 6 Jun 2004 02:03:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 16085-82; Sun, 6 Jun 2004 02:03:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 6742772C1A5; Sun, 6 Jun 2004 02:03:02 -0500 (EST) Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list oracle-l); Sun, 06 Jun 2004 02:01:40 -0500 (EST) X-Original-To: oracle-l@freelists.org Delivered-To: oracle-l@freelists.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 0304872C0E3 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2004 02:01:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 16085-57 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2004 02:01:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from web20422.mail.yahoo.com (web20410.mail.yahoo.com [66.163.169.98]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with SMTP id 6E72E72C084 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2004 02:01:39 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040606072028.90629.qmail@web20422.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [68.167.57.168] by web20410.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 06 Jun 2004 00:20:28 PDT Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 00:20:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Paul Drake Subject: Re: UltraSPARC IV To: oracle-l@freelists.org In-Reply-To: <20040605144621.88136.qmail@web50606.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at freelists.org X-archive-position: 2101 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-To: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: discgolfdba@yahoo.com Precedence: normal Reply-To: oracle-l@freelists.org X-list: oracle-l X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at freelists.org --- Michael Thomas wrote: > This can be amazing technology, especially in the > wrong hands. ;-) if you read the output of dmesg off of a linux box with a kernel that knows the difference between a physical and logical cpu, you'll see that the runqueue of logical is mapped to the physical. from just watching top, in a dual cpu system, the 2 physical CPUs will be loaded prior to any processes running on the logical(s). one can see overall cpu usage higher than 50% with hyperthreading enabled. if the storage system is some form of RAID-F, the cpu wait % will be high enough that its not going to matter if you enabled or disabled hypterthreading anyways. Mike - I'm sure that I'm not saying anything that you don't already know. Paul > > --- Matthew Zito wrote: > > > ... > > time, so its a little disingenuous to claim a > > doubling of performance. > > > > Multi-core processing is different from Intel's > > HyperThreading > > technology - in that case, its a single processor > > core that shows > > itself as two processors. This is because Intel > has > > built a certain > > amount of possible parallelization into their > > processors already that > > generally wasn't being taken advantage of by > ... > > Its an easy trap to fall in. Running my first 3.2GHz > CPU Hyperthreading PC I wondered why the individual > processors were almost never running over 50% > utilization. Must have a really powerful PC. Doh! > > Then I realized *if* the two Hyperthreading CPUs > totaled over 100% it must be because of pipelining > or > parallelization of tasks. The only program I ever > saw > that made both Hyperthreading CPUs go to 100% > simultaneously was SETI@Home. Obviously, it was > programmed to *use* the technology. > > I can just see some 'well-meaning' SA (how tactful > was > that!) attempting to add more databases to one of > these systems because "the CPUs are under utilized, > and never go above XX percent". Could be > entertaining... "My whole system is slow"... you > know... > > Regards, > > Mike Thomas > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------