Hyper threading / multi core

how do you get java to use HT and multi core

you do not i want to run to threads at exactly
the same time i do not want to call yield and things
like that;Are you fucking completley stupid here or what?
i want to call Thread1 and Thread2.run() at the same
time so they are prosesed at the same time;
and do not want to call
Thread1.run();
thread1.sleep(1100) or thread1.yield() or
thread1.stop()
Thread2.run()There is so much wrong with that.
a) NEVER EVER call stop.
b) Who says you have to yield?!?!
Now repeat carefully after me.
IT WILL RUN BOTH THREADS AT THE SAME TIME WITHOUT USING YIELD
Again now...
IT WILL RUN BOTH THREADS AT THE SAME TIME WITHOUT USING YIELD
So please do shut up and consider finding a tutorial that explains threads and use that.
Again YOU ARE WRONG.
As jverd said what will actually happen (re usage of multi-processors, cores etc) is out of your control. But if the VM and hardware can handle it then it will work.
The problem remains you don't understand threading in the slightest.

Similar Messages

Aggregate Storage And Multi-Threading/Multi-Core Systems

Please pardon if this question has been asked before, but the Forum search is not returning any relevant results.
We are in the process of purchasing hardware for an 11.1.2 Essbase environment. We are going 64-bit, on Windows 2008, with either 32 GB or 64 GB of system RAM. The debate we are having is the number of CPUs and cores per CPU. We have not built any ASO databases as of yet, but we plan to launch a major BSO to ASO conversion project once 11.1.2 is off the ground here.
Historically, with BSO, we did not see performance improvements significant enough to justify the cost of additional CPUs when we ran calcs on multi-CPU systems vs. single or dual CPU systems, even when the settings and design should have taken the most advantage of BSO's multi-threading capabilities. However, it would seem that ASO's design may be able to make better use of multi-core systems.
I know that there are a lot of factors behind any system's performance, but in general, is ASO in 11.1.2 written well enough to make it worthwhile to consider, say, a four CPU, total 16 core system vs. a 2 CPU, total four core system?

Grand central dispatch - infancy, not really doing its job, and I don't think apps have to be specifically written for HT, but they do have to not do things that they use to - prevent threads from going to sleep! or be parked.
high usage is not necessarily high efficiency. often the opposite.
Windows 7 seems to be optimized for multi-core thanks to a lot of reworking. Intel wants and knows it isn't possible to hand code, that the hardware has to be smarter, too. But the OS has a job, and right now I don't think it does it properly. Or handle memory.
Gulftown's 12MB cache will help, and over all should be 20% more efficient doing its work.
With dual processors, and it doesn't look like there are two quick path bridges, data shuffling has led to memory thrashing. Use to be page thrashing with not enough memory. Then core thrashing but having the cores, but not integrated (2008 is often touted as being greatest design so far, but it was FOUR dual-cores, 2009 was the first with a processor that really was new design and (native) 4-core.
One core should be owned by the OS so it is always available for its own work and housekeeping.
The iTunes audio bug last year showed how damaging and not to implement code and how a thread could usurp processing and add a high cpu temperature while basically doing nothing, sort of a denial of service attack on the processor - those 80*C temps people had.
All those new technology features under development and not like OpenCL, GCD and even OpenGL are tested, mature but rather 1.0 foundation for the future. A year ahead of readiness.

Once and for all: Hyper-threading, turbo boost on Core i5 MBA?

Hey, all.
There is a lot of conflicting information on whether the new Core i5 MacBook Airs (as opposed to the upgraded Core i7 options) support hyper-threading. As best I can gather, there is still no "official" Apple statement on the subject. I thought I'd gin up another conversation in the event someone has more definitive information. In case anyone wants a fresh bit of provocation, earlier today I asked one of Apple's online "Live Chat" experts. Here's what she said:
The Core i7 offers Triple Channel memory, hyper-threading, and full dual 16x video bandwidth.
But the i5 doesn't offer the TurboBoost or hyperthreading.
You would have to do the upgrade to the i7 for that.
Agree? Disagree?

Here is a comparison of the three processors used for the 2011 MBA.
It would appear that the i5 does have Turbo Boost (and Hyperthreading), unless Apple's specification calls for disabling TB.
But, if we look at some of the benchmark testing, the results would seem to imply that the specification only differs by the differences shown in these charts, hence Turbo Boost would be evident across all the Airs.

SAP XI on a multi-core, multi-thread server?

Hi Everyone!
Can anyone tell me whether SAP XI can run on a Server whose processor is multi-core, multi thread (4 cores, 8 threads per core, 32 threads)?
Thanks in advance!
Warm regards,
Glenn

Hi Ravi,
Thanks for your reply! The server in question is SUN Solaris. What sort of confguration needs to be done on both the OS side and on XI? Is there a SAP note I can follow?
Warm regards,
Glenn

Multi-threading JVM implementation on multi-core Linux

Does the Linux JVM run separate threads on separate cores in a multi-core machine? What rules does the scheduler use to make that decision?

Yes but the scheduler is an OS functionality, not Java. You the Java programmer should not worry about that. Important things on Java programmer level are written in the book:
http://www.amazon.com/Java-Concurrency-Practice-Brian-Goetz/dp/0321349601/ref=pd_bbs_2/104-0029622-4532777?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1185504553&sr=1-2

Public static Thread currentThread() and multi core processors??

Hello,
I have the following basic question: what does public static Thread currentThread() mean in the context of multi core processors where several threads may execute concurrently?
Any clue welcome,
J.

Hi balteo,
When you invoke Thread.currentThread(), you get the reference of the current thread : the thread where you make the call.
Just try :
System.out.println("My program is running thread : " + Thread.currentThread().getName());
mean in the context of multi core processors where several threads may execute concurrently?Several threads may run concurrently with single core processors. The number of concurrent threads you may execute depends of the processors architecture and the OS.

Different clock frequency on hyper-threaded cores?

I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask, It's not really an issue but has be bothering me for some time now and google didn't find an answer for me....
I'm currently using an i7-5500U with 2 physical cores (4 HT cores).
Yet, when I check the clock frequency on the system it shows a different value for each of the 4 HT cores:
cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep MHz
cpu MHz : 3001.031
cpu MHz : 2975.906
cpu MHz : 2994.468
cpu MHz : 2901.562
How can this be possible when there are only 2 physical cores?
Shouldn't the HT cores share the same frequency on the same physical core?
If I'm getting this right, hyper-threading simply means interleaving 2 instruction streams into a single (physical) core to reduce pipeline hazards right?
This just boggles my mind....
Last edited by akiroz (2015-06-06 19:05:33)

The numbers are different each time, here are 3 more samples:
cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep MHz
cpu MHz : 2937.187
cpu MHz : 2954.250
cpu MHz : 2977.500
cpu MHz : 2990.250
cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep MHz
cpu MHz : 2954.812
cpu MHz : 2981.812
cpu MHz : 2996.343
cpu MHz : 2987.062
cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep MHz
cpu MHz : 2969.250
cpu MHz : 2936.718
cpu MHz : 2985.093
cpu MHz : 2980.031

Is Aperture 3 enabled for hyper-threading?

That would make the difference betweening getting a Mac with a Core i7 processor.

There is a big difference between multicore and hyper-threading.
Basically you have three technologies, multiprocessor, multicore and hyper-threading. The first two give you multiple physical hardware. In the case of the first, multiprocessor, you get multiple independent CPU's. In the second, multicore, you get multiple processing units on a single chip.
In the third case, hyper-threading, each processor gets a logical 'twin'. That each each physical processors pretends to be two processors.
So that's the hardware. From a software perspective you have multi-tasking multu-processing and multi-threading.
Multi-tasking is the illusion that many things are happening at once on a single core system. Its been around since the late 60's usually called a time sharing systems. The OS switches between tasks loading one in as it unloads another. Happens fast enough so that it appears that things are happening at the same time but they are not.
Multi-processing is multi-tasking but on a system with multiple cores (or cpus). Each core gets a program and can run simultaneously. OS X was designed for this from the beginning using SMP (symmetric multiprocessing). So each application you are running gets its own core
Multi-threading is multi-tasking within a single application. Again OS X is designed for this. Applications create threads and then the OS can run those threads on an available core. Of course it doesn't always make sense to do this. If the application needs a calculation to finish before it can proceed nothing is gained by running the calculation on a separate core.
Aperture makes use of a lot of the technology in the system. Which will give you the biggest performance hit is hard to say. I still haven't seen any real world benchmarks on Aperture. Maany users here have there own stories and will swear by the solutions they have decided on.
The GPU is important. Aperture uses the Core Imaging Technology and the best GPU you can get for your system is a plus. However Core Imaging is also setup to make use of the fastest execution path available. So if you;re doing something that he CPU can do faster then the GPU it will go that route. And in that case having extra cores lying around would be a plus.
So to answer your intended question, does Aperture make use of multi-threading (not hyper-threading). The answer is yes. Does it make a tremendous difference, that depends on your definition of tremendous. You'll never get twice the performance when running on two cores that much I can say for sure.

What Do Multi-Core Processors Do?

I posted a thread on this some time ago, and my understanding was that a multi-core processor allowed for computing tasks be performed simultaneously. Rather than one after another, which is what a single-core processor would do. This is often applied within the applications themselves, to increase execution speed. Such applications being multi-threaded applications.
But I've recently learnt that even single core processors can execute code in more than one thread. So in this sense, what extra functionality does having multiple cores give you? Or am I wrong in thinking that single core processors can do this too? I'm trying to weigh up the advantages of buying a Mac Pro over a different model like an iMac.
There's a hole in my understanding somewhere, I just don't know where it is.
Any info appreciated.
Many thanks,
Adam

multi-threading varies by application
Think of the system having reserved rights to 0, some background task(s) to 1, Safari on 2, etc. is one scenerio.
Some but not all or even a lot of apps are truly multi-thread.
Faster processor cores are still more important than how many cores.
one core with hyper-threading can execute two threads, and deliver 20-35% more in performance at the expense of running hotter and using more watts. HT came back in 2009 with Nehalem and Core i-Series.
Dual processor, two cpus, have been around for a long time on Macs back to G4/500DP and dual and quad-core is just more efficient to manufacture and build into systems (dual core Atom or A8's in mobile devices).
Programs that worked without HT sometimes don't work properly with H-T until they are recompiled and optimized properly.
Your real question is what Mac to buy though, and what you actually plan to run and do.
And there are processors for laptops, desktop, towers and more. And all have different performance.
http://www.intel.com/products/desktop/processors/index.htm
http://macperformanceguide.com/index_topics.html
Some iMac vs Mac Pro
http://www.barefeats.com/imac10o.html
http://www.barefeats.com/imac10v.html
So getting things to work in multi-core, multi-threaded, how much memory you want, the need for multiple drives (SSD boot drive and 1TB data drive even in iMac now), and graphic offerings.
Start with what you use, then to what you need to buy. Don't put the cart before the horse. A Mac Pro or iMac may seem at first to be on somewhat equal footing.
http://www.barefeats.com/wst10c2.html
There is a huge range in performance on MacBook/Air/Pro platform.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbpp31.html

Intel HT (Hyper-Threading) BIOS 1.9?

Sup People!
My Intel HT (Hyper-Threading) don't work right now, what to do?
I was told that I need the new BIOS 1.9 for HT to work?
I have: Intel P4c with HT
Intel 875P with HT
MS Windows XP Professional Version 2002 & SP 1
There is no option button in the BIOS 1.8 for HT!
What do I need to do? Please Help
TaZ ...
Also I have a new OVER CLOCK speed! MY 875P NEO @3420MHz/1140MHz FSB !!
It's a old thread so look at post #7
http://www.msi.com.tw/program/service/forum/index.php?sid=&postid=188033#post188033
TaZ

Sup & THX people for all the INFO!
Hay Schiers,
"I can switch it on and off like I want. The option to allow/disallow it is about
MP (advanced settings) and the version to support."
I have a Intel SL6Z3 Pentium 4c 2.4GHz 800MHz FSB with HT. This new chip come's with the NEW MO core stepping. (Costa Rica) Now Im trying to over clock this Vcore 1.70v CPU to 275MHz FSB (3.3GHz/1.1GHz FSB) 5:4 ratio, Ram 2.70v DDR440 - 220MHz @CL2.0-3-3-7-8 with my PC3500, AND WITH HT (HYPER-THREADING)
Right now my Vcore 1.60v CPU and 225MHz FSB @(2.7GHz/900MHz FSB) 1:1 ratio Ram 2.70v DDR450 - 225MHz @CL2.5-3-3-7-8 and NO HT (Hyper-Threading) On Intel STOCK Air.
I have also tryed Vcore 1.6 CPU and 260MHz FSB @(3.12GHz/1.04GHz FSB) 5:4 ratio, RAM 2.60v DDR416 - 208MHz @CL2.0-3-3-6-8 and NO HT (Hyper-Threading) On Intel STOCK Air.
http://www.msi.com.tw/program/service/forum/index.php?threadid=32697&sid=
PLEASE HELP ME! GET HT (Hyper-Threading) WORKING!
Please show how to do it step by step please
I have BIOS 1.8 (Bugy) Need Bios 1.9 for new microcode update to get HT properly recognized with an option!
OR IS THERE ANOTHER OPTION?
TaZ

PSE 10 both Organizer and Editor crash on multi-core hardware; set affinity to single cpu mode fixes

As I have noted in thread http://forums.adobe.com/thread/941128 I have found that both the editor and the organizer for PSE 10 crash in a multi core environment, I am running WIndows 64 bit, latest updates (includes sp1), I had the same problems with Windows 7 32 bit.
Solution is to set the affinity to a single cpu. From the task manager, select the 'processes' tab, find the exe (eg PhotoshopElementsOrganizer), right-click, select 'Set affinity...' and reduce the number of CPUs selected (checked) to exactly one. (Under different versions of Windows the exact means for doing this varies, but the essential steps are the same). It doesn't matter which cpu you select, but if you do both the Editor and the Organizer, put them on different CPUs.
Given that pretty well all hardware these days is multi-core, my assumption is that Adobe test in a virtualized environment and so do not discover this type of unreliabillity. Adobe really do need to test their software more thoroughly as the exact same problem existed in PSE 6, so it is hardly new to them.

The solution is in the above.
Should Adobe read this, they should take note that a virtualized environment does not provide a decent fidelity emulation of multi-core CPU systems. The ONLY way to test the reliability of an application is on REAL hardware.

Dual Processor Multi Core Parrell Processing Question

Hey Guys
I'm looking for a little clarification on an issue with parrell
processing in LabView. If I have a Dual Processor machine with two 4 core CPU's
will be able to access all 8 cores in the LabView environment. I'm presuming it
can use any cores the operating system can see?
Thanks for the help,
Tom
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Norbert B wrote:
it is the job of the OS that applications can use all cores if necessarry. So for the application itself, it should make no difference if the system (in hardware) is MultiCPU, MultiCore or even simply HyperThread.....
Norbert
Its true, but I would like to add my 5 cents here.
Lets say, if you have single loop like
while (true){
//do something
then OS will get no chance to run it in multiple threads. So, you will get max 12,5% CPU load at 8 cores PC or 50% max on dual core PC.
I have dual core PC right now, and lets check it:
So, as we can see - 50% CPU load reached (one core loaded more, but its another story).
Well, if we will use two while loops, then we will get 100 % load:
Of course, if you will need to load all 8 cores, then you should have 8 parallel loops.
Compare BD above with the following:
We have two Array minmax functions, and they independend, but we have 50% only.
Well, you can get also 100% CPU utulization withing single while loop. In th example below you have two SubVI, which called in the same loop:
We have here 100 %. Important, that these VIs should be reenterant!
See what happened if they not reeenterant:
Now a little bit about Vision. Behing of most of the Vision SubVIs are DLL calls. Some Vision functions already optimized for multicore execution. For example, convolution:
On the BD above we have single loop with one SubVI, but both cores are used (because convolute itself already optimized for multi core).
Remember, that not all Vision functions optimized yet. For, example, LowPass still single-threaded (compare this BD with BD above):
Sure, we can utilize multi cores - just perform parallel execution (you have to split image to two parts, then join together and so on):
Remember, that SubVIs should be reeentrant, and all DLL calls should be thred safe (not in UI thread). Also good idea to turn off debugging in such experiments for eliminate additional CPU load.
Another point about 8 cores. As far as I know, LabVIEW (and LabVIEW-based application) will support only 4 cores within one execution system by default (at least prior to LabVIEW 2009). If you need to utulize all 8 cores, then you should add some lines into LabVIEW.ini. Refer to the following thread where you can found more details:
Interpolate 1d slow on 8 core machine
Hope all written above was correct.
Thank for reading and best regards,
Andrey.
Message Edited by Andrey Dmitriev on 11-27-2009 02:50 PM

64-bit and Support for Multi-Core Computers

I recently bought one of the new 12-core Mac Pro's from Apple, but was disappointed to see the lack of 64-bit support and optimization for multi-core computers within InDesign. When producing magazines with hundreds of pages and hundreds of fonts, the need for multi-core support and 64-bit processing are vital.
Can anyone at Adobe confirm that they will implement this in CS6? It's long overdue.

InDesign is a really complicated program. 64 bit support is of marginal use of InDesign. It would be faster (as is the case using ID Server 64 bit on Windows), but I'm not sure how much of a difference that would make for the average desktop user.
Adobe has done a lot of multi-threading work under the hood for CS5 (and pdf export is one of the first fruits of that). What further support they might add for CS+, is anyones guess, but it'll be easier now that a lot of the preliminary work is done. Each feature would be a separate effort, so if there's something SPECIFIC you'd like to see multi-threaded, I suggest you write that in a feature request. The more detailed you can be about it, the better!
Harbs

SAP Permormance on Sun T2000 multi core servers.

Hi guys,
On some of the newer sun servers, the performance isn't quite as good as what you would expect.
When you are running a specific job, let say patching using saint for instance the process works as expected, but the disp+work process seems to be just allocated to 'one' of the servers CPU's, rather than the process being distributed across the servers multi-cores, and doesn't seem to be much if any quicker.
I'm sure some of our ZONE settings in S10 must be wrong etc, but have followed the documentation precisely from SAP.
Am i missing some Solaris functionality or do we have to tell SAP to use multi-cores ?
Just intrested in other peoples experiences on the newer Sun servers
Regards
James

An ABAP workprocess is single threaded. Basically that means that the speed of any ABAP program is running is CPU-wise only dependent on the speed of the CPU.
An ABAP system can't leverage the multi-core multi-thread architecture of the new processors seen on the single process. You will see e. g. a significant performance increase if you install a Java engine since those engines have multiple concurrent threads running and can so be processed in parallel as opposed to the ABAP part.
What you can do to speed up an import is setting the parameter
PARALLEL
in the STMS configuration. Set the number to the available number of cores you have. This will increase the import speed since multiple R3trans processes are forked. However, during the XPRA still only one workprocess will be used.
Markus

1 core VS multi core in a web application: performance issue

Hi,
I'm having trouble with a web application in a multi cpu server (w2ksp4, iis+wl9.2)
I have prepared a set of JMeter stress tests, and the application is only capable to finish 5 transactions in a multi cpu (2 cpus with 2 cores each) but if I bind the JVM of the weblogic process to only 1 core, then the application can handle more than 60 transactions without errors.
I'm in production side; developers tell me "hardware problem" but it seems more likely a poorly designed application (as per my previous experience with them)
The syntoms are lot of null pointers exceptions and threads stuck when in multi core scenario.
Althought I have not put lot of details, any of you have ever seen something similar?
If anybody needs further information please feel free to ask
Thanks,
Antonio

What operating system are you using?
make sure you are trying a certificated configuration JDK and OS.
Oracle Fusion Middleware Supported System Configurations
If using unix/Linux OS based you migh be hitting low entropy issue, you can add
-Djava.security.egd=file:/dev/./urandom to JAVA_OPTIONS and retest the issue
Best Regards
Luz

Hyper threading / multi core

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for