Joinutility seperatorLogin utility separator Infobright.com
   
 
CPU requirements and parallelization of queries
Posted: 25 February 2009 07:19 AM   Ignore ]  
Newbie
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  7
Joined  2009-02-25

Hi folks,

I’m a newbie with InfoBright that I evaluate for a POC. Sofar I’m quite impressed by
the results on a mere PC running Ubuntu 8.10 (desktop).

We’d run InfoBright IEE or ICE on a better server though, that still has to be defined. Hence the following questions:

- We have a question regarding the behaviour of the IEE version
(compared with the ICE) :
does a big query get applied to more than a CPU/CORE or does it solely
reside on a single CPU/CORE as in ICE ?

- The underlying issue is the choice of CPU make for our server: what is
the priority ?
- the speed of each core (CPU clock + FSB clock) or
- the sheer amount of COREs or
- the cache or
... whatever parameter ?

I personally would prefer the cores of this cpu ( http://ark.intel.com/cpu.aspx?groupId=36893 )
over this one ( http://ark.intel.com/cpu.aspx?groupId=36947 ).

What would be your choice ?


Thanks.

E.M.

Profile
 
Posted: 25 February 2009 07:34 AM   Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  578
Joined  2008-08-18

Hi Emmanuel,

As for now, both ICE and IEE work on single core per query, so your number of cores should reflect a projected number of concurrent users. (However, IEE does utilize many cores on data load.) Fast CPU and memory is quite important as we must decompress data packs while query execution.

Regards,

Signature 
Profile
 
Posted: 25 February 2009 08:51 AM   Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  648
Joined  2008-08-18

Hi !

Loading speed on IEE is much better than on ICE thanks to multithreading. You can count 2-4 cores to be utilized by a single load, but if you have many VAR/CHAR columns in the loaded table, more cores can be employed. Also, if you plan to load many tables at the same time, additional cores will be necessary.

We have not tested in detail particular CPU models. However the first one you mentioned seems fine. It has more cache per core, which is important. Also it should be significantly more efficient to put two 4-core CPUs than one 6-core.

For single user scenario put rather few fast cores with fast memory. For multiuser, more cores are important.

Hope this helps a little
Cheers

Profile
 
Posted: 25 February 2009 11:23 AM   Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  94
Joined  2008-08-18

Hi,

If let me choose from 2 CPUs :X5492 (12M Cache, 3.40 GHz, 1600 MHz FSB, 4 cores)  and X7460 (16M Cache, 2.66 GHz, 1066 MHz FSB, 6 cores), I would prefer X5492, for its higher clock and FSB, plus it’s only half the price. Unless you have large number of heavy concurrent users, multi-core will not help you too much. 4 cores from X5492 can support 4 concurrent users very well, and X7460 can support 6.

I don’t have much knowledge about how important is the CPU cache, but I do see the query performance difference of CPU clock + FSBs.

Thanks

Profile