Re: Game Company- Java Server Thread Priority
From: Grant Wagner (gwagner_at_agricoreunited.com)
Date: 01/27/04
- Next message: Uncle Al: "Re: Mars Rover Not Responding"
- Previous message: Alan Balmer: "Re: Mars Rover Not Responding"
- In reply to: BlackHawke: "Re: Game Company- Java Server Thread Priority"
- Next in thread: Roman: "Re: Game Company- Java Server Thread Priority"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:28:56 GMT
Just to clarify, CPUs with hyperthreading don't "confuse" Windows into thinking
there are more CPUs, its the way it's supposed to work. You may be interested in
reading the document at:
<url:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/server/evaluation/performance/reports/hyperthread.asp
/>
No, there is no problem with hyperthreading, but read the article at the URL I
provided because it discusses issues about CPU licensing and how incorrect
enumeration of hyperthreaded processors could cause Windows to be using two
logical processors on the same physical CPU instead of two logical processors.
"It is critical that the BIOS count logical processors in the manner described;
otherwise, Windows 2000 or its applications may use logical processors when they
should be using physical processors instead. For example, consider an
application that is licensed to use two processors on the system diagrammed in
Figure 1. Such an application will achieve better performance using two separate
physical processors (such as 1 and 2) than it would using two logical processors
on the same physical processor (such as 1 and 5)."
Also note that if you have a 2 CPU license for your application, the 2nd logical
processor on each CPU simply won't be used, so you might as well disable
hyperthreading to avoid any overhead it causes.
I apologize that it's specific to Windows 2000, I was in a hurry and didn't try
to locate a similar document for Windows 2003, but I'd assume most of the
information in that document applies to Windows 2003 as well.
BlackHawke wrote:
> We do have dual Xeon processors...
>
> Out of curiosity, is there a problem with hyperthreading? Will we run faster
> if we disable it?
>
> Nick
>
> "Nigel Wade" <nmw@ion.le.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:bv3426$rrc$1@south.jnrs.ja.net...
> > BlackHawke wrote:
> > > I know that there is CPU Throttling in Windows 2003... Is that only for
> IIS?
> > >
> > > We found a way to compile this into native code... It's now revved up to
> 25%
> > > of the CPU cycles during intense work... I notice that in the
> "performance"
> > > section of the task manager it lists 4 CPU's (we only have 2)... It's
> > > letting us max out one of the "4" to 100%.... Any way to let it max them
> > > all?
> > >
> > > Again, I increased the priority, but no luck....
> > >
> > > Nick
> > >
> >
> > That implies you've got dual Xeon processors with Hyperthreading enabled.
> > That might be confusing Windows into thinking you've got 4 processors. How
> > many processors is the verion of w3k on that system licensed for? It could
> > be ignoring processors for which you don't have a license. Of course, this
> > is pure speculation on my part...
> >
> > Try disabling Hyperthreading in the BIOS so Windows only sees the 2
> > processors you actually have, and see what happens.
-- | Grant Wagner <gwagner@agricoreunited.com>
- Next message: Uncle Al: "Re: Mars Rover Not Responding"
- Previous message: Alan Balmer: "Re: Mars Rover Not Responding"
- In reply to: BlackHawke: "Re: Game Company- Java Server Thread Priority"
- Next in thread: Roman: "Re: Game Company- Java Server Thread Priority"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
