8 core benefits?

Hi,
I'm looking to buy a new mac pro (hoping for an update soon) and I was wondering how much Logic 8 benefits from an 8 core mac pro as opposed to a 4 core one. Currently you have to pay quite a lot more for an 8 core, but if this means you'll really benefit from twice the processing power, this is something to think about...
Thanks in advance.

HI RealDave,
The article is in the UK PC Pro mag and is a review of the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650 (codenamed Penryn). I've checked their site but it only seems to be in the mag at present so sorry no link.
Here's a few quotes though:
"Our test CPU was the top-end Quad core 2 Extreme QX9650, running at 3GHz. The clock speed has caused surprise in some quarters: it was widely believed that the new Extreme part would debut at 3.33GHz. Buss speed and preferred chipset are identical to those of the previous top end part, the Core Extreme QX6850, with a 1,333MHz front-side buss......"
"Against the 3GHz QX6850, percentage performance improvement is never close to double figures. The extra cache and some instruction-pipeline tweaks give the QX9650 only around a 6% boost against the QX6850 in our most CPU-bound test,the 3ds Max render..."
"the message from these first test results is that if you have a current-generation quad core CPU you won't gain much performance by upgrading...."
""...big performance gains will only come once the higher-clocked parts that the 45nm will allow are released"
This is only what I read though so don't shoot the messenger!

Similar Messages

2.3 or 2.6 quad core MBP?

alright, getting the 15 inch MBP for christmas, I'll be upgrading the RAM and the HDD to an SSD in the months following, so the base specs aren't that important for me. the big question is: should i stick with the 2.3 or the 2.6 quad core? obviously I'd like the 2.6, but that's also 2 grand... I'll be running autodesk programs through bootcamp or parallels, like revit, 3dsmax, and maya, although not at the same time. I'll also be running CS5 programs, and ableton live 8. I'd imagine the most programs I'll ever have open at once would be revit, photoshop, firefox, itunes, and mail. will the 2.3 quad with 16 gigs ram and an SSD be able to run them well? obviously i'll only usually have revit and itunes up, but I don't want to be pushing my computer to the limit at all times, and if the 2.6 is going to be worth the $300 more, I'll do that. plus, that way I could put off the upgrading of RAM for a little longer since that MBP comes with 8 gigs standard.
i will need to do a lot of convincing to the mom though, since she's helping fund this, and I already had to convince her to bump up from the 2.9 ghz dual core 13inch to the 15 inch one for the quad core benefits.
thanks in advance.

not really...
i'm already paying for most of it, and it's acting as a christmas gift and graduation gift, and i'll be using it in grad school. i'm not swindling my mom out of 300 bucks. we're both viewing it as an investment, since i'll be using the programs i mentioned in school, and outside of school. i'm leaning towards the 2.3 simply because i don't want my mom to have to pay even more, and i'll be upgrading the ram and ssd anyway on my own, which will bost the performance noticeably. however, if it's going to make that much of a difference, i'd like to just go for it now, since i don't feel like replacing the motherboard.
however, after doing some more research, i've decided on the 2.3, since we don't feel like spending 2 grand on a computer, and the 2.3 will be sufficient. thanks for not at all answering my question vortex.

App that need admin rights

I have an app they the support people state you need to login in as admin to run. I can confirm this. Even when I virtualized the app I still could not run it as a non-admin. I made a ZEN app and run it as a unsecure system user.
I think the software is poorly made, but do not have any choice.
Is there something is ZAV to make it run as a admin that I am missing?? The thing is we may be moving away from ZEN 7 to something else, but will still use ZAV.
M

$(UIt really depends on what the app is trying to do. One of the core benefits of ZAV is not having to be admin to deploy applications. For example, if an app needs to read/write from System 32, this can be done in the Virtual System 32.
The app may be checking the rights on the logged in user and seeing if it's in the Administrators group. If that is the case, virtualization will not help you.
Andy
>>>
From:
mgh2468<[email protected]>
To:
novell.support..zenworks.application-virtualization
Date:
10/6/2010 05:36 PM
Subject:
app that need admin rights
I have an app they the support people state you need to login in as
admin to run. I can confirm this. Even when I virtualized the app I
still could not run it as a non-admin. I made a ZEN app and run it as a
unsecure system user.
I think the software is poorly made, but do not have any choice.
Is there something is ZAV to make it run as a admin that I am missing??
The thing is we may be moving away from ZEN 7 to something else, but
will still use ZAV.
M
mgh2468
mgh2468's Profile: http://forums.novell.com/member.php?userid=28152
View this thread: http://forums.novell.com/showthread.php?t=422728

CMP vs BMP

hi friends
coud any tell me the core benefits/asvantages of using CMP beans on the BMP ot vice versa!!!
or any disadvantage of using any specific type... with that were should be use the CMP and where BMP
thxs!

CMP is advantegous for portability. The sql statement/parameter/tuning is done outside the java code. Very good approach if you are J2EE component vendor because your client may not use to Bea, IBM, Sun, or XXXXX product.
BMP is adventegous if you know how to tune the sql by hand, by assumption that your tuned-by-hand sql far overperform the performance of CMP's SQL, otherwise CMP is still recomended. People won't use this approach if they sell J2EE component, why? Not everyone will use WebLogic+Oracle but your code is optimized for WebLogic+Oracle.
Please pardon my bad english.

Performance comparison---using LABVIEW..between Embedded and general-purpose Intel's single VS multi-core CPU

hi guys;
kindly, can any one tell me : is it possible to use Labview installed on desktop pc to show up statistically the main performance key features between mutlicore systems and single core systems but with (two versions, embedded and general purpose CPU) . in other words: I'm trying to resemble embedded cpu with general purpose CPU so that i can only work on Desktop pc than say that the obtained results are the same for embedded multicore CPU.
to get things more clear:...embedded multicore processors are now hitting the embedded market segments such as (small and portable devices with internet, multimedia and wimax tech. enabled that take advantage of recent multicore tech.).
general-puroses Multicore processors: like desktop and servers based processors,
according to what 've read, Intel is producing same processor model but with different applications : (embedded and general-purposes applications)

Hello,
Please look at this page which shows a new feature in LabVIEW 2009, but particularly interesting is the video which shows the performance benefits on a PC platform of single core VS multicore.
LabVIEW doesn't have any ability to emulate a multi-core embedded processor (unless its an intel x86 processor that labVIEW supports!) so to discover the performance benefits of embedded multicore processors, you would need an external hardware board and devise a test in which labVIEW can measure the timing via an external pin toggled by a program running on the embedded processor that could utilise multiple cores (there may be other ways but this is the way that comes to my mind).
I hope this helps you!
Mark B
===If this fixes your problem, mark as solution!===

Windows Vista 64 bit w/older 2 dual core 3.0ghz Mac Pro with NVIDIA 7300

I have read a variety of the posts that have appeared here on the use of Windows Vista 64 bits on a Mac Pro. I remain confused, and but want to do this. I have a Mac Pro purchased in the Spring of '07 with dual 3.0Ghz dual core Xeon cpus and 10gb of ram, using the NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT and running 10.5.1, with multiple drives. I want to run the 64 bit version of Vista Ultimate to use my ram, and to gain the performance this box should offer. It appears that I have three options:
1. Boot Camp: I don't know if the drivers are available, seems like the new Mac Pro drivers probably would not work, even if I could find them, since I have an older Mac Pro with a pair of the dual core Xeon CPUs. Don't know if there is an alternate source than Apple for the drivers, or a way to get around the problem in boot camp.
2. Parallels: I do not believe that 64 bit apps are supported by Parallels
3. Fusion: Their web site says they support Win Vista 64 bit, but it is not clear to me on the web site where the drivers are obtained, or perhaps they are built in to Fusion. Will I get the performance and memory benefits in fusion? Or is the OSX virtual overhead so high that this is a fools errand?
I do a lot of video editing, and fully 95% of my life is in the Mac world, but I have individuals who send files for editing, and occasionally they require Windows tools, much to my chagrin. I also have a small number of programs that need Windows 64. I occasionally am required to do some development work, and would like to use this machine for that purpose if it can indeed run Win Vista 64bit. I have XP loaded on a more modest box andit is running fine when I need it, which isn't very often.
Any help, or successful experience in running Windows Ultimate 64 bit on this hardware, utilizing its resources would be greatly appreciated.

Here are my results after further digging online and from my own experience.
Here is the procedure:
1. Check whether your Mac has the 32-bit EFI or 64-bit EFI
http://www.ihackintosh.com/2009/08/snow-leopard-106-and-64-bit-what-you-need-to- know/
2. Create a Boot Camp (BC) partition for Windows 7 x64. Resize the partition size using the slider in the BC app. Follow the instruction, insert the Windows 7 disk and reboot.
3. This will load the PC partition which is FAT formatted for now. Choose the Boot Camp partition on which to install Win 7, but choose in the option to format that partition. It will automatically format it in NTFS. Otherwise, it will not install on that partition.
Note : A "OEM System Builder" Windows 7 64-bit Professional UPGRADE install without any issues what so ever. The upgrade disk is a full install. Read this for further information:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/174288/windows7_upgrade_madecheaper.html
4. Run windows, then insert the Snow Leopard disk. It will tell you your hardware cannot support x64 version. Do the following procedure to manually install the driver:
http://michael.anastasiou.me/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=22%3Aq boot-camp-x64-is-unsupported-on-this-computer-modelq-solution&catid=7%3Ahow-to&l ang=en
5. Then update Boot camp using Apple Software Update in Windows.
6. All hardware works fine except the sound. The sound only comes out of the internal speaker, even when headphone or speakers are plugged in the jack. Installing the Realtek High Definition Audio Codecs driver in order to fixe the problem. Shutdown and reboot to make it applicable. Try a second time if it still does not work:
http://218.210.127.131/downloads/downloadsCheck.aspx?Langid=1&PNid=14&PFid=24&Le vel=4&Conn=3&DownTypeID=3&GetDown=false
That's it.

2011 MacBook Pro, 64 bit i7 quad core, upgraded to Lion OSx, Bootcamp installed with Windows 7, wanting to install Windows 8 (don't ask), tried downloading/installing bootcamp 5.0.5033, error message something similar to bootcamp doesn't support this Win

2011 MacBook Pro, 64 bit i7 quad core, upgraded to Lion OSx, Bootcamp installed with Windows 7, wanting to install Windows 8 (don't ask), tried downloading/installing bootcamp 5.0.5033 (both on the mac/windows partitions (actually using a parallel to run Windows)), error message something similar to bootcamp doesn't support this Windows
So the question is am I doing something wrong? Should I just try and install windows 8 through my windows 7 partition and see if I can use the bootcamp 5.05033. Or do I solely have to use the bootcamp to install Windows 8? I'm not too familiar with bootcamp and how it runs.

if you're using parallels and full bootcamp then you're making it 100% more troublesome for youself then it needs to be
bootcamp is running windows directly on the hardware this give full memory and cpu and 3d video game power
running windows in parallels is running a virtual machine where one can't run powerful games and the like but one can have it in a window and change fast between osx and windows
parallels as the only virutal machine (as far as I know) support not have the operating system as a file on the osx harddisk but can access a bootcamp parition as virtual machine but without the benefits bootcamps provides
it's a service parallels provide for those who want both to play games in normal bootcamp and sometimes use windows in a virutal machine
just install it like a normal virtual machine and you need not worry about bootcamp drivers and the likes
plus it would mean that the windows part would be a part of the timemachine bacup of osx
which it is not when it's in bootcamp

MacPro Quad Core 32g Ram running slow Logic using only 9g in Activity Monitor

Well its taken a while, but this is my first foray into the world of forums! I'm so hacked off with this regular problem and havent been able to find anything anywhere to solve it i thought i'd see if anyone has any similiar issues and maybe even a solve to it.
So.... im an orchestrator and producer and after my mid 2008 Macbook Pro with 8g ram started freezing up i invested in this 3 years ago -
Mac Pro 2x 2.4ghz Quad Core intel Xeon and stuck in 32gb of lovely Crucial RAM and 3 seperate internal 1TB drives with one for operating system (10.6.8), one for Audio recording/saving and one for all my sample libraries.
32gb ram - should be enough i thought!
So i regularly run at least 30 VI's - Ni The giant, Spitfire Orchestral librabies (say 12 string instruments up to 0.69g per load) LASS strings, plus perc STYLUS, ABBEY road drums, Trillian basses (acoustic/electric), ominisphere etc etc. So pretty hefty sample instruments. But theyre sooo nice!!
In addition, the 32 bit server will come alive (NOT! So unstable i find) with my Waves plugs etc.
Looking at ACTIVITY MONITOR however i might be not touching 9 gig (and sometimes even less) of usage for Logic, and only say 800MB for 32 bit server and have NOTHING else open - and what do i find .....
- Mouse lag and cant really do anything with the mouse whilst playing the track - cant adjust volume - too slow, zooming problems
- Takes a good 2-3 seconds for track to stop playing
Dont get System OVERLOADS so much, its just that the system goes REALLLLLY slow.
What ive tried- - -
- Running Mountain Lion off another drive (havent had time to install it and wanted to be sure everything worked etc)
- Tried all audio prefs - large/small buffers/threads etc and yes i am on 1024.
in a nutshell how come with 32g RAM everything is so slow when barely using 10g of that???????
I dread getting to the end of a project cos i know im gonna be freezing so much, but with so much editing all the time for the orchestral parts i need everything unfrozen and working.
Sorry if this is long winded but wanted to describe what im experiencing.
Any feedback most welcome! Thankyou in advance.
Mac Pro 2x 2.4ghz Quad Core intel Xeon 32g RAM, 3TB storage
10.6.8
Logic Pro 9.1.8

Hi
A few thoughts:
julian6400 wrote:
In addition, the 32 bit server will come alive (NOT! So unstable i find) with my Waves plugs etc.
The 32bit server is a pita: Waves v9 are 64bit compatible (they run fine). 32 bit VI's can be run outside Logic using Vienna Ensemble Pro (see later)
julian6400 wrote:
So i regularly run at least 30 VI's - Ni The giant, Spitfire Orchestral librabies (say 12 string instruments up to 0.69g per load) LASS strings, plus perc STYLUS, ABBEY road drums, Trillian basses (acoustic/electric), ominisphere etc etc. So pretty hefty sample instruments. But theyre sooo nice!!
Some of these VI's are extremely CPU hungry: Abbey Rd drums for example, really do hammer the CPU. What does Logic's Performance meter show in the way of CPU load. What does Activity Monitor show regarding CPU load?
With 32G of RAM, this should not be the issue, but you might have general CPU problems (see above), and you may also have Sample disk streaming limitations if all the Loibraries you mention are on the same drive. How does Activity Monitor look regarding disk access? You might find it helpful to add a second drive and split the sample libraries across 2 for faster disk access.
I presume that you have plenty of free space on the System drive?
Logic can get sluggish if the Undo info gets way too big, and also if there are loads of regions in the Arrange: check Options:Project Information.
Many are finding some benefits (me included) by running the VI's in Vienna Ensemble Pro:
Better CPU load distribution than directly in Logic
"Persistant Samples": they can remain loaded whilst you switch Logic Projects
Logic is effectively running much less itself, so generally flies.
32bit Plugs hosted separately in VEP so no 32bit Bridge issues in Logic
Something to consider,though perhaps not yet, would be setting up a Slave computer using VEP.
CCT

How to define CPU sets for different hardware cores?

We're doing a small benchmarking research on parallel benefits of Niagaras, and as one part of
the research, we want to find out whether there are performance differences between hardware
CPU cores and strands within a core. From theory, only one strand of a core is executing at any
given moment, others are "parked" while waiting for IO, RAM, etc. So it may be possible to see
some difference between a program running with 4-processor "pset"s, i.e. 4 strands of one core
and 4 separate cores.
While I can use psrset or poolcfg/pooladm to create and bind actual processor sets consisting
of a number of processors, I have some trouble determining which of the 32 CPU "id numbers"
belong to which hardware core.
On a side note, an X4600 server with two boards lists 4 "Dual-Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor
8218 CPU #" entries in prtdiag, but 8 "cpu (driver not attached)" entries in prtconf, and
Solaris recognizes 8 processors in pooladm. Again, there's no clue which of these 8 processor
cores belongs to which socket, and this information could be important (or at least interesting)
for SMP vs. NUMA comparison within otherwise the same platform.
So far the nearest ideas I got were from some blog posts about pooladm which suggested to
make a CPU set for a worker zone with CPU IDs 0-28, and moving hardware interrupts to CPU
IDs 29-31. I could not determine whether these are single strands of separate cores, or 3 of 4
strands on a single core, or some random 3 strands how-ever Solaris pleases to affine them?
Is this a list defined somewhere (i.e. IDs 0-3 belong to core 0, IDs 4-7 belong to core 1 and so
on, according to Document X) or can this be determined at runtime (prtdiag/prtconf)?
Is this a fixed list or can the "strand number-CPU core" relations change over time/reboots?
Perhaps, does Solaris or underlying hardware deliberately hide this knowledge from the OS
administrators/users (if so, what is the rationale)?
Finally, am I correct to believe I can place specific CPU IDs into specific psets via pooladm?
Looking at /etc/pooladm.conf I think this is true (the default pool lists all CPU IDs of the
system), but wanted some solid confirmation :)
Thanks for any ideas,
//Jim

A Sun Fire E2900 with 4 dual-core UltraSPARC-IV chips:
# prtdiag
System Configuration: Sun Microsystems sun4u Sun Fire E2900
System clock frequency: 150 MHZ
Memory size: 16GB
====================================== CPUs ======================================
               E$          CPU                  CPU
CPU      Freq      Size        Implementation       Mask    Status      Location
0,512 1350 MHz 16MB        SUNW,UltraSPARC-IV    3.1    on-line     SB0/P0
1,513 1350 MHz 16MB        SUNW,UltraSPARC-IV    3.1    on-line     SB0/P1
2,514 1350 MHz 16MB        SUNW,UltraSPARC-IV    3.1    on-line     SB0/P2
3,515 1350 MHz 16MB        SUNW,UltraSPARC-IV    3.1    on-line     SB0/P3
# psrinfo -p -v
The physical processor has 2 virtual processors (0 512)
UltraSPARC-IV (portid 0 impl 0x18 ver 0x31 clock 1350 MHz)
The physical processor has 2 virtual processors (1 513)
UltraSPARC-IV (portid 1 impl 0x18 ver 0x31 clock 1350 MHz)
The physical processor has 2 virtual processors (2 514)
UltraSPARC-IV (portid 2 impl 0x18 ver 0x31 clock 1350 MHz)
The physical processor has 2 virtual processors (3 515)
UltraSPARC-IV (portid 3 impl 0x18 ver 0x31 clock 1350 MHz)
# prtconf | grep cpu
            cpu (driver not attached)
            cpu (driver not attached)
            cpu (driver not attached)
            cpu (driver not attached)
            cpu (driver not attached)
            cpu (driver not attached)
            cpu (driver not attached)
            cpu (driver not attached)A 6-core single-T1 Sun Fire T2000:
# prtdiag
System Configuration: Sun Microsystems sun4v Sun Fire T200
System clock frequency: 200 MHz
Memory size: 8184 Megabytes
========================= CPUs ===============================================
                            CPU                 CPU
Location     CPU   Freq     Implementation      Mask
MB/CMP0/P0   0     1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P1   1     1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P2   2     1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P3   3     1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P4   4     1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P5   5     1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P6   6     1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P7   7     1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P8   8     1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P9   9     1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P10 10    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P11 11    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P12 12    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P13 13    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P14 14    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P15 15    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P16 16    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P17 17    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P18 18    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P19 19    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P20 20    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P21 21    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P22 22    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
MB/CMP0/P23 23    1000 MHz SUNW,UltraSPARC-T1
# psrinfo -p -v
The physical processor has 24 virtual processors (0-23)
UltraSPARC-T1 (cpuid 0 clock 1000 MHz)
# prtconf | grep cpu
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)
    cpu (driver not attached)//Jim

12 core Mac Pro does not improve render time over iMac quad core

I'm rendering the same composition independently on two computers and they are basically rendering at the same rate, which is slightly better than 1 frame per second.
The project settings and preferences are identical in each instance (with the exception of memory and multiprocessing, which I have experimented with ad nauseum). The composition includes no motion blur, no effects, just a couple of layers of chroma keyed .mov files (using keylight 2.0) and some still images. Neither machine is running any other applications, except occasionally Google Chrome, which seems to have no effect on performance.
Both systems are running the latest version of After Effects CC (2014) and using the Classic 3D renderer.
System 1 MAC PRO:
Mac Pro 12 core 2.7 GHz Intel Xeon E5
dual AMD FirePro 500D 3072 MB GPUs
32 GB RAM
OS X 10.9.4
System 2 iMAC:
iMac quad core 2.5 GHz Intel Core i5
AMD Radeon HD 6750M 512 MB GPU
8 GB RAM
OS X 10.9.3
As you can see, system 1 is vastly more powerful, and yet no combination of memory/multiprocessing settings can get the system to render faster than system 2.
It doesn't seem to matter how much or little RAM I reserve for other applications (I have settled on 4 GB), or the number of CPUs I reserve for After Effects. The one setting that has improved performance is turning OFF render multiple frames. And even then it only brings the performance of the Mac Pro up to par with the iMac. I have cleared my cache, rebooted the computer, and read everything I can find online regarding the optimization of render settings.
Here's a comparison of the respective CPU Loads:
iMac
Mac Pro
With such a low CPU load, After Effects is obviously not utilizing the resources available to it on the Mac Pro. What a waste.
Can anyone help?

There's plenty of debate about the new Mac Pro vs a kitted out iMac. Benchmarks show that some iMac After Effects processing can actually be faster than on a Mac Pro, depending on the content and some other factors. If you're using software that has been optimised for the Mac Pro's GPU-centric architecture, like Final Cut Pro X, you will see great benefits.
mac pro vs imac
In my own facility recently we opted out of purchasing Mac Pros this year, and bought top-end iMacs instead. The benefit to cost ratio simply didn't make sense for us right now. Mac Pros are awesome machines, but a significant component of their cost is the dual GPUs, which are simply no benefit to After Effects.
Reports say that the After Effects engineers are working on a major revamp of the After Effects processing system, so I'm betting you will realise far greater benefits from your Mac pro in coming AE versions. For now, you may continue to see performance that is not spectacularly better than a souped-up iMac, depending on the type of processing involved.
I've seen a few benchmarks that suggest the 8 core systems give better bang-for-buck than the 12 cores. Try reducing your processors to 8 in After Effects and see if it makes a difference. With 8 cores, allocate 3GB of RAM per core to leave some RAM for the OS.

How can I close core thread in ThreadPoolExecutor?

If I use unbounded LinkedBlockingQueue in ThreadPoolExecutor and set the core pool size to 5. When more than 5 tasks are submitted, there will be 5 threads created to handle the request. After finish, these threads will not be closed. How can I make the threads in core pool be closed when finishing their job? I couldn't use maximum pool for that I do need an unbounded queue.

If you really want that functionality, set the core pool size to 0, the maximum pool size to 5 or greater, and the keepAliveTime to 0L. This will remove excess threads as soon as their tasks have completed.
It's very wasteful though if you plan on executing the tasks repeatedly to create new threads everytime you submit a task. One of the benefits of using a thread executor is not having to construct and start a Thread object everytime you run a task.
Brushfire,

ESS Benefits Generic Enrollment - Different behavior backend v/s portal

We are using the ESS Benefits generic enrollment service for enrollment kicking off the adjustment reasons on IT 0378.
Here is the configuration set up, trying to simplify to explain the matter. We are on ECC 6.0 with EHP2.
1. Configured one plan type in savings category.
2. Within this plan type, configured 2 plans.
3. Configured all other related configuration to set up the 2 plans.
4. Configured the adjustment reason and the appropriate plan type created in step 2.
5. Created the required adjustment reason on 378.
In HRBEN0001 transaction via backendwe can see the 2 plans configured within the plan type.
But when Trying to enroll from ESS - only one plan can be seen for that plan type, the other plan is not shown at all.
OK - eventually, debugged and found this piece of code in FM HR_BEN_ESS_FILL_SELECTION_DISP. The 2 different plans are there until this piece of code takes one of them Off...
CODE -
3.) Reduce entries to one entry per type and period
delete adjacent duplicates from selection_display_gt
    comparing pernr
              barea
              bpcat
              pltyp
              begda
              sprps.
CODE -
This FM is called only for ESS application and not for backed program.
What we do not understand is why is it behaving differntly on backend v/s portal.
Any information or experience with this form any one of you will be highly appreciated.
Thanks.

Siddharth,
Thanks for your reply. Yes ESS has its own FMs. The UI, user exits, BADIs etc are different for backend v/s front end.
What we are not clear with, is the different behavior in core functionality -- i.e. When the adjustment reason is processed from the backend using HRBEN0001 - The 2 plans within the Plan Type are available for elections. BUT the same adjustment reason for the same penr when processed from ESS - there is just one plan available for elections.
It's clear from the code, that it is deleting one plan and this code is within the FM which is called only from ESS. But we are still not sure why it should behave differently i.e. 2 plans via backend v/s one plan via ESS.
Wanted to see if anyone can share any information if they have a similar benefits set up .. 2 plans within one plan type FOR savings plan category and then having a adjustment reason set up.
Regards.

What are the key benefits and limitations of new pricing model of X5-2?

What are the key benefits and limitations of new pricing model that started with X5 version?

1. Elastic Configurations
Size/price hardware by the number of servers; Fixed configs no longer required
Start with 2 Database Servers and 3 Storage Servers. Incrementally add database or storage servers online.
2. Capacity-on-Demand (CoD)
Upon installation, activate 40-100% of the cores per server and reduce software licenses; Applies to Eighth Rack now too
Activate and license more cores when needed; Active cores may not be deactivated
3. OVM and Trusted Partitions
License software on Virtual CPUs within a VM; Ideal for special-purpose DB options
You can mix different combination of options for different DB on one Exadata.
OVM has no License cost; support is included with premier hardware support
Limitation:
At least 40% of usable cores on the machine must be licensed for Oracle software
Cannot use both OVM and CoD to license less than 40% of cores
A server must be virtualized or non-virtualized – not mixed
A RAC cluster can mix virtualized and non-virtualized servers
4. “Flash Drive” License Metric for EF Storage Server Software
$20K/drive; 8 flash drives/EF server vs 12 disk drives/HC server = 33% higher list
Can transfer licenses between Flash Drive (2 licenses/drive) and Disk Drive (1 license/drive) – part # is the same

8 core SLOW performances

Here's the picture:
http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/4493/usocpuclaudiagl5.jpg
The main problem is: the sum of all CPU use is ALWAYS under 400%: this new 8 core Mac Pro is SLOWER than my "old" 4 core...
Is there something I should do?
Than you in advance.

At least we don't have to worry that you migrated from a G5 Quad and didn't do clean installs of your applications.
Compressor 3 is muti-threaded and optimized, so that should be fine.
Not everything is though, and not everything can be or benefits, there are still applications that should only use one core to avoid "core thrashing" and having to move data and memory between cores.
The good news is that Intel released (announced actually at IDF yesterday) more tools for developers to help with parallel processing. And next year's Nehalem is an actual Quad-core. What Penryn does is package two packages of two cores into a 4-core chip, it is not really a true quad-core, more like 4 dual-core on two front side buses (another bandwidth bottleneck).
Motion 3 graphics:
http://www.barefeats.com/harper10.html
Final Cut and Compressor: (this addresses your concerns)
http://www.barefeats.com/octopro5.html
I had saved some notes from a conference when Compressor 3 first was demoed but can't find those, which pointed to reduction in time to complete over Compressor 2 was significant.
In a year, upgrade again, and in the meantime, check and see if your graphics (8800GT I assume) or disk drive configuration, or run a cluster (kidding).
http://www.apple.com/macpro/performance.html

Code and core tables in different schemas

Hi,
My db version : Oracle Database 11g Enterprise Edition Release 11.2.0.3.0 - 64bit Production
I would like to understand, the pros and cons of the following situation:
We have a single application.
The db design for this application has 44 tables out of which 28 are core tables related by PK and FK relationships. The remaining 16 are look up and reference tables which are not related to any.
The team decided to place the 28 core tables in one schema A and the remaining 16 in another schema B within same database. (The reason for this is..since it is done in other projects lets do it here too).
Now comming to the code (stored procs, functions, packages etc). The teams wants to place most of the code in the schema B that has the 16 ref tables. (the reason again being the same).
What are the pros and cons doing this???
Please advice.
PS:
I have googled and found sth on these lines:
cons:
o harder to manage
o harder to upgrade
o harder to patch
o harder to maintain
o causes your shared pool size to increase 1,000 times (shared sql goes down the tubes)
o takes more space
o queries against the dictionary will be impacted
o latching on the shared pool goes WAY up (latching = locks = serialization device =
slows you down)
pros:
o none that I can think of.

>
I would like to understand, the pros and cons of the following situation:
Yes I am straining to find more points (was not good at it though).
>
You just want to understand? Are you sure? Your thread reads more like you just want to do things your way and are looking for support.
>
The team decided to place the 28 core tables in one schema A and the remaining 16 in another schema B within same database. (The reason for this is..since it is done in other projects lets do it here too).
Now comming to the code (stored procs, functions, packages etc). The teams wants to place most of the code in the schema B that has the 16 ref tables. (the reason again being the same).
>
My question to you is: what PROBLEM are you trying to solve? If the 'team' already uses this approach and there haven't been any substantive problems then why try to change things now? Why have you chosen to fight this battle?
Your 'team' has already decided and now, after that decision, you want to argue about it with them? The time to present arguments for/against a given plan is BEFORE the decisions are made, not after. Once a decision is made you need to be a team player and implement that decision to the best of your ability.
One thing I'm certain of. If you try to support your argument using things like that 'AskTom' link you posted any credibility you had will go out the window. That link, as you already hinted yourself, is not your use case at all. All it takes is for one of your 'team' members to point that out and everyone will pretty much stop listening to any other arguments you make.
People are generally not going to 'change their ways' unless you can show them:
a) there is something seriously wrong with the way they are now doing things or
b) a new way of doing things provides some substantial benefits
Choice 'a' above is where you need to start but you haven't provided ANY information in this post that you have identified any serious issues with the status quo.
The main task for Oracle is to be able to FIND the objects being referenced. So, in my opinion, that is what you should focus on when looking for PRO/CON arguments.
That is: What issues are there if an object being referenced is in a different schema than the session that needs to use the object?
1. objects may need to be prefixed with the schema name
2. public or private synonyms may need to be created/maintained to avoid having to deal with item #1 above
3. new grants may be needed to implement/maintain the proper security
4. new roles may need to be created to maintain proper security (see item #3 above)
5. additional work will be needed to maintain the new roles in item #4 above
6. PL/SQL code may not be able to reference the object or may reference the wrong object
7. Roles are disabled in PL/SQL (see item #6 above) - this means that the new grants (see item #3) may need to be granted directly to the schema users that need access instead of to roles. That can make it harder to create and maintain a role-base security schema.
If I were you I would spend my time on other more important thingsd. But if I chose to fight this particular battle then I would make a list of problems that occured in the past with the current method of doing things and also problems related to the above list of items and then show how many of those problems will 'disappear' if the new method is used.

8 core benefits?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for