Limiting parallelism to only some of the processors?

We are considering turning off parallelism on our server. I've read a
few articles that also talk about limiting parallelism to a certain
number of processors instead of turning it off completely. They say
that this requirement is rare but don't describe situations where it
might be useful.
Does anyone have any information about scenarios where limiting
parallelism to a certain number of processors could be useful?
ThanksIt is very often more efficient to set sql server to use only one cpu for
each worker thread. Testing will be what determines whether it is effective
on your data with your code.
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
<pshroads@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177369370.045211.148410@.l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> We are considering turning off parallelism on our server. I've read a
> few articles that also talk about limiting parallelism to a certain
> number of processors instead of turning it off completely. They say
> that this requirement is rare but don't describe situations where it
> might be useful.
> Does anyone have any information about scenarios where limiting
> parallelism to a certain number of processors could be useful?
> Thanks
>|||On 24.04.2007 01:02, pshroads@.gmail.com wrote:
> We are considering turning off parallelism on our server. I've read a
> few articles that also talk about limiting parallelism to a certain
> number of processors instead of turning it off completely. They say
> that this requirement is rare but don't describe situations where it
> might be useful.
> Does anyone have any information about scenarios where limiting
> parallelism to a certain number of processors could be useful?
Did you see these?
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqltips/archi.../14/466387.aspx
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlcat/archiv.../30/498415.aspx
robert|||Hi,
Are you using Hyperthreaded CPU's? If you are look at these threads in this
NG.
Dated April 12th - Option (MAXDOP 1)
Dated April 19th - Hyperthreaded CPU's
Chris
<pshroads@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177369370.045211.148410@.l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> We are considering turning off parallelism on our server. I've read a
> few articles that also talk about limiting parallelism to a certain
> number of processors instead of turning it off completely. They say
> that this requirement is rare but don't describe situations where it
> might be useful.
> Does anyone have any information about scenarios where limiting
> parallelism to a certain number of processors could be useful?
> Thanks
>

Limiting parallelism to only some of the processors?

We are considering turning off parallelism on our server. I've read a
few articles that also talk about limiting parallelism to a certain
number of processors instead of turning it off completely. They say
that this requirement is rare but don't describe situations where it
might be useful.
Does anyone have any information about scenarios where limiting
parallelism to a certain number of processors could be useful?
ThanksIt is very often more efficient to set sql server to use only one cpu for
each worker thread. Testing will be what determines whether it is effective
on your data with your code.
--
TheSQLGuru
President
Indicium Resources, Inc.
<pshroads@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177369370.045211.148410@.l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> We are considering turning off parallelism on our server. I've read a
> few articles that also talk about limiting parallelism to a certain
> number of processors instead of turning it off completely. They say
> that this requirement is rare but don't describe situations where it
> might be useful.
> Does anyone have any information about scenarios where limiting
> parallelism to a certain number of processors could be useful?
> Thanks
>|||On 24.04.2007 01:02, pshroads@.gmail.com wrote:
> We are considering turning off parallelism on our server. I've read a
> few articles that also talk about limiting parallelism to a certain
> number of processors instead of turning it off completely. They say
> that this requirement is rare but don't describe situations where it
> might be useful.
> Does anyone have any information about scenarios where limiting
> parallelism to a certain number of processors could be useful?
Did you see these?
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqltips/archive/2005/09/14/466387.aspx
http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlcat/archive/2005/11/30/498415.aspx
robert|||Hi,
Are you using Hyperthreaded CPU's? If you are look at these threads in this
NG.
Dated April 12th - Option (MAXDOP 1)
Dated April 19th - Hyperthreaded CPU's
Chris
<pshroads@.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177369370.045211.148410@.l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> We are considering turning off parallelism on our server. I've read a
> few articles that also talk about limiting parallelism to a certain
> number of processors instead of turning it off completely. They say
> that this requirement is rare but don't describe situations where it
> might be useful.
> Does anyone have any information about scenarios where limiting
> parallelism to a certain number of processors could be useful?
> Thanks
>