cpu horsepower for database

[Martha Mueller]

We are doing capacity planning. Our DBA has stated that too much cpu horsepower is bad for a database, so we are trying to "right size" the unix server. I'm just asking for opinions and comments....do you think that more numbers of smaller cpu's are better or worse than fewer high-powered cpu's for database work? The only application running on the server is the database, so there really doesn't seem to be any reason to keep a cpu just for the operating system to use.

[Pete Randall]

Hi Martha,

On a 6 CPU N-class, we devote 5 440Mhz CPUs to our Informix database and leave one for the OS to do it's housekeeping. Runs like a champ. My opinion is - the more the merrier, the faster the better.

Pete

[harry d brown jr]

That has to be the biggest pile of horse dung I have ever heard of: ""too much cpu horsepower is bad for a database""

Your dba needs to wake up to reality and stay focused on DateBase Administration and stay out of the SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATION. I'm not sure I'd let them login again to my server :-)

As for your system configuration, we would need a LOT more info:

(1) how many users?
(2) what kind of applications and how do they interact with other applications?
(3) what is the resourse consumption profile of each user/application?
(4) available disk, memory, network, ...
(5) Release of OS, patch level, DataBase release, 32 or 64 bit?
(6) amount of money in budget?


live free or die
harry

[Stefan Farrelly · Accepted solution]

I agree with Harry. Whoever said too much cpu is no good for a databases is talking crap.

In fact, less cpu's but faster ones is better than more cpu's that are slower. ie; 6x 550Mhz is not as good as 4x750Mhz. Most of the kernel work is done on the first cpu - so the faster cpu's you can get (instead of number of them) the better everything will run.

[Christopher McCray_1]

Hello,

That is odd... I wonder what the background for his statement is.... I guess idle cpus become frustrated and bored so they start picking on the database???

Anyway, you should start by looking at what you currently have. I believe that most of the 9000 servers need at least 2 cpus to run. You may want to look into icod (instant capacity on demand). This way you can "turn on" additional cpus as you need them, and hp will bill you at that point for the additional cpus.

Hope this helps

Chris

[harry d brown jr]

Thanks Stefan! I thought I had heard it all, but that DBA learned me something new.

and Chris, I'm glad I wasn't drinking coffee when I read your comment, because I would have spit it out laughing: "" I guess idle cpus become frustrated and bored so they start picking on the database??? ""

live free or die
harry

[Martha Mueller]

Thanks, Harry. I thought it was just me. However, I was just fishing for general type of information about number of cpu's vs. power of cpu's. Thank you Stephan. There is always the issue of cost of licenses that are based on a per cpu basis. Chris, that is pretty much what was explained...the database will spend more time looking for work, if none is found, goes to sleep. Then it takes extra time to get going again.

[Pete Randall]

You do have to weigh the costs involved, but like I said, Martha, the more the merrier, the faster the better.

Good luck,

Pete

[harry d brown jr]

Martha,

That explaination is crazy: ""the database will spend more time looking for work, if none is found, goes to sleep. Then it takes extra time to get going again""

If you had a SLOWER CPU it would take LONGER to service my request, making EVERYTHING SLOW.

Maybe your DBA is thinking about Micro$ucks Operating systems and software??

live free or die
harry

[Ravi_8]

Hi,

I Have a oracle database running N-class(rp7400) with 8 processors. we can say it is a super database server