How the T2000 handles 20,000 Database Connections

I have recently changed careers at Sun, moving from a pre/post-sales technical role to an engineer role. I now work in Sun's PAE (Performance Availability & Architecture Engineering) group.

You could say I am definitely enjoying the change, getting to play with real geeky stuff :)

Both jobs had the opportunity to play with new hardware, but the new job should see me get much more play time with pre-release systems, which I find very interesting.

Anyway, I had the chance to do some testing on one of our new systems that many customers have also had a great chance to test on - the T2000.

The workload I am using is designed to replicate a database query load that is common for some parts of modern on-line retail operations - almost exclusive relatively simple queries, running pretty much fully cached in the RAM of the database server. The queries come from a very large population of clients (5 - 20 thousand).

As a highly analytical fact-oriented engineer, you need to realise that up until my first opportunity to experience the T2000 first-hand, I remained just a little sceptical that it could deliver something like the promise of what I had heard. It has been covered that the T2000 suits some workloads better than others - I was keen to get a quantitative understanding of this to support the qualitative things I had heard.

My base system I had been doing tests on was an 8-CPU (16 core) E2900. I expected this would provide a pretty fair comparison to a system that has 8 cores in its single CPU. In fact I knew of some preliminary numbers for the T2000 which made be think the E2900 would come out slightly ahead.

I need to update my thinking. The advantage of four threads per core is proven by reality, with the 8-core T2000 showing it certainly had greater throughput for my workload than the 16-core E2900.

As you can see in the graph, the T2000's CPU consumption is well ahead of the E2900 (lower is better). Also, as I scale up the number of connections (keeping the overall throughput the same), the T2000 does not see as much of a penalty for the increase.

Chart: CPU Utilization - E2900 v T2000

References:

Comments:

Post a Comment:
Comments are closed for this entry.
About

Tim Cook's Weblog The views expressed on this blog are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Oracle.

Search

Archives
« April 2014
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
  
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
   
       
Today