Parallelism Question

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Ryan

    Parallelism Question

    If SQL Server is designed for multi processor systems, how can running
    a query in parallel make such a dramatic difference to performance ?

    We have a reasonably simple query which brings in data from a few none
    complex views. If we run it on our 2x2.4Ghz Xeon server it takes 6
    minutes plus to run. If we run this on the same server with
    OPTION(MAXDOP 1) at the end of the same query it takes less than a
    second.

    Examining the execution plan, the only difference I have been able to
    see is that parallelism is taking up 96% of the run time when using
    two processors. This drops when using the one so a sort takes up the
    vast majority of the time for the query to run.

    OK, so running in parallel should mean that it's run in various parts
    and then 'joined up' later for performance gains, but how can it get
    it so wrong (timewise) ?

    If this is the case, will I see a significant difference changing our
    server to use a single processor, which seems completely the wrong
    approach (or should I do this on each query in each app - eek) ?

    Do we have a problem that we don't know about that causes it to take
    this long ?

    What can we do ? Ideally, using both processors would seem to be
    preferrable.
  • Ryan

    #2
    Re: Parallelism Question

    We've changed the server to use a single processor at the moment and
    the report that my query is based on works almost instantly. We're
    waiting to see what effect this has for other users, but so far,
    no-one has complained.

    Are we wasting a second processor ?

    Comment

    • Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)

      #3
      Re: Parallelism Question


      "Ryan" <ryanofford@hot mail.com> wrote in message
      news:7802b79d.0 312160816.68d60 164@posting.goo gle.com...[color=blue]
      > We've changed the server to use a single processor at the moment and
      > the report that my query is based on works almost instantly. We're
      > waiting to see what effect this has for other users, but so far,
      > no-one has complained.
      >
      > Are we wasting a second processor ?[/color]

      No. There are definitely times it can help.

      You may want to open a ticket with MS. In general, when the query optimizer
      finds such a poor optimization they consider it a bug. (If you can, review
      Kalen Delaney's article in this month's SQL Server Magazine.)



      Comment

      Working...