Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
![]() |
![]() |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Wildfire/Oracle/NUMA/QBB affinity on OpenVms/Oracle73
In article <3a7fb92b.2226779_at_news-server>, nsouto_at_nsw.bigpond.net.au.nospam (Nuno Souto) writes:
>
Don't overlook hardware helping out too. Some people get antsy when futures are trotted out. But some folks make decisions based on futures (Sandia/Celera, Los Alamos, European SuperComputer Centre) so we shouldn't be that nervous. This afternoon, the following presentation takes place:
http://www.isscc.org/isscc/2001/ap/ap/AP_forWeb_Nov16.pdf
15.6 A 1.2 GHz Alpha Microprocessor with 44.8 GB/s Chip
Pin Bandwidth
A 4th generation Alpha microprocessor running at 1.2 GHz delivers up to 44.8 GB/s chip pin bandwidth and dissipates 125W at 1.5V. It contains a 1.75MB 2nd level write-back-cache, two memory controllers supporting 8 Rambus(tm) channels running at 800 MB/s, four 6.4 GB/s inter-processor communications ports, and a seperate IO port capable of 6.4 GB/s. The chip measures 21.1x18.8 mm2 and contains 130M transistors.
What interests me more than bandwidth is latency. Latency is the issue (as everyone has bandwidth or soon to, i.e. Power4, Ultra III) now. From what we see, latency gets much better with EV7, this link is no longer there:
http://www.alphapowered.com/alpha21364.ppt
But if it was there you would notice that local latency is "30 ns CAS latency pin to pin" (slide 17) and L2 latency is "12 ns load to use" (slide 16) with "15 ns processor to processor latency" (slide 18, i.e. remote memory routing) so it *appears* if the memory is two hops away , you may be looking at < 150 ns memory access if the page is open (sure, add a few dozen nanoseconds for routing , whatever). Point is latency for Alpha gets MUCH better and NUMA *should* become less of an issue for future Alpha hardware. Perhaps they talk more about latency this afternoon. RobReceived on Tue Feb 06 2001 - 10:50:10 CST
![]() |
![]() |