[concurrency-interest] Thread Allocation

Nathan Reynolds nathan.reynolds at oracle.com
Wed Feb 13 09:50:46 EST 2013

I have heard that building your system to deal with asynchronous I/O 
will perform much better.  With synchronous I/O, the thread blocks and 
waits.  This incurs 2 context switches as well as ties up a thread and 
all of its resources.  With asynchronous I/O, the thread submits the I/O 
request and continues to do other processing.  When the I/O completes, a 
thread picks up the result and continues processing. Asynchronous I/O 
allows 1 thread to submit enough I/O requests that the underlying 
storage system can optimize how the requests are stored.  For example, a 
bunch of random writes using synchronous I/O will cause the disk head to 
seek wildly since each write has to go to a different location.  A bunch 
of random writes using asynchronous I/O will give the underlying system 
a chance to sort the writes and have the disk head make a single pass 
over the disk.  Disk performance will greatly improve.

Nathan Reynolds 
<http://psr.us.oracle.com/wiki/index.php/User:Nathan_Reynolds> | 
Architect | 602.333.9091
Oracle PSR Engineering <http://psr.us.oracle.com/> | Server Technology
On 2/13/2013 2:34 AM, Chris Vest wrote:
> If you can tell before hand which tasks (that you submit to the thread 
> pools) are going to be IO bound and which are going to be CPU bound, 
> then you can have to separate thread pools: a big one for the IO bound 
> tasks and a small one for he CPU bound ones.
> Otherwise I'd say just set a high upper bound (upwards hundreds, but 
> depends on expected distribution) and let the OS manage things, see 
> how that works and if its performant enough, then you're done.
> Note that I have no idea what kind of performance is expected of your 
> SIEM system.
> Chris
> On 13/02/2013, at 09.48, "Pete Haidinyak" <javamann at cox.net 
> <mailto:javamann at cox.net>> wrote:
>> I have a question on how to allocate Threads. I am creating a SIEM 
>> which is a bunch of independent Java Services. The most likely use 
>> case is this will run on one 2U box. The box will have two quad core 
>> Xeon processors and 32G of RAM. Some of the Services will be I/O 
>> bound but some will be CPU bound.
>>   In one of the latest discussion it was mentions that you should 
>> allocate a Thread for each core (plus or minus a couple) for the best 
>> throughput. I have the ability to turn the Thread Pools after startup 
>> based on the number and types of Services running on the box.
>> My question is what would be the best way to allocate Threads when 
>> you have multiple processes competing for resources?
>> Thanks
>> -Pete
>> _______________________________________________
>> Concurrency-interest mailing list
>> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu 
>> <mailto:Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu>
>> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest
> _______________________________________________
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/concurrency-interest

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/attachments/20130213/dfbcb000/attachment.html>

More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list