RE: Hyperthreading - Oracle license

From: Bobak, Mark <Mark.Bobak_at_proquest.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 16:34:07 -0500
Message-ID: <6AFC12B9BFCDEA45B7274C534738067F0181619E59_at_AAPQMAILBX02V.proque.st>

Actually, a quick MOS search, and Oracle specifically recommends staying w/ the "doubled" count for cpu_count.

See Doc ID 289870.1

-Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Christopher.Taylor2_at_parallon.net Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 4:24 PM To: rjoralist2_at_society.servebeer.com; oracle-l_at_freelists.org Subject: RE: Hyperthreading - Oracle license

If you find something like that, shoot it out to me. I'd be interested in making sure if I need to set anything like that.

Regards,

Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Rich Jesse Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2013 3:09 PM To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: RE: Hyperthreading - Oracle license

Chris writes:

> I love irony - I just got asked about turning hyperthreading on for
> our db servers. Apparently it was cut off (I didn't even know we had
> it) because no one wanted to pay for the extra licensing.

Yeah, but thought I read somewhere that CPU_COUNT should be manually set to the number of "real" (non-hyperthread) cores to prevent the instance from over-allocating resources (e.g. parallel query).

Durned if I can locate that bit of mental flake at the moment...

Rich

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l


--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l




--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Thu Jan 10 2013 - 22:34:07 CET