[THIN] Re: thread quanta and chkroot.cmd thingy
- From: "Brian Madden" <brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 09:58:40 -0400
OK Everyone,
I have my own theory on this. But first, step back and take a look at who
has had input (either directly or indirectly) on this thread:
Rick Dehlinger
Kevin Goodman
Rick Mack
Tim Mangan
Mark Russinovich
David Solomon
I mean wow! This is why this group rocks! These people are the best of the
best.
What are the results of this thread? Some say change the setting to
foreground mode and some say change to background mode. Not everyone agrees.
One thing is known for sure. The actual foreground (application) or
background (server) mode "performance boost" doesn't really matter since
"foreground" applications are only at the server console. However, what does
matter is the fact that changing this setting also affects the amount of
time (quanta) that any process has guaranteed access to the processor.
If you want my opinion (which you're going to get whether you want it or
not), I would bet (although unsubstantiated) that it doesn't really matter
in a Terminal Server environment. Here's why I think this setting doesn't
matter:
Based entirely on information from this thread, it appears that the maximum
allowed time slice we're dealing with here (based on this setting) is either
180ms or 30-60ms (this changes depending on number of processors, etc.)
Well, if you have a server running at 1GHz, you have one million clock ticks
for each millisecond. 180M ticks in 180ms, and 30M-60M ticks in 30-60ms. I
would think that an individual process probably wouldn't need that much
time. Furthermore, I would think that the system couldn't possibly give that
much time away anyway.
For example, if a thread was able to use its full 180ms time slice, only 5.5
threads would execute per second. Imagine you have a server with 50 users.
In order for each user to get access to the CPU at least once per second,
they would need to have threads execute for them for a maximum of 20ms. (1s
/ 50users = 0.02s each). This is well under even the 30ms limit as
configured by this setting. Then, on top of that, remember that each user
has multiple threads running, etc, and that they need access to the server
more than once per second. I guess my point is that in a Terminal Server
environment, I can't possibly imagine a single thread coming anywhere near
the time slice/quanta limit, whether the limit is 30ms, 60ms, or 180ms.
My completely theoretical and totally unsubstantiated theory: This setting
does not matter on a Terminal Server.
Brian
Brian Madden
202.302.3657
brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--------
Visit www.brianmadden.com for thin client white papers, books, product
reviews, courseware, and training videos.
I guess my "official" policy on this will be that I don't know. If you want
more performance and have the time to play, then try changing it.
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Mack, Rick
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 7:21 AM
To: 'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: [THIN] Re: thread quanta and chkroot.cmd thingy
Hi Brian,
Got into a discussion with Rick Dehlinger about this a few years ago and
called in Mark Russinovich as a referee.
His opinion was that it does matter. Smaller timeslices (quanta) mean a more
responsive system when you've got a lot of processes, but at the cost of
more context switches per second. So overall excecution efficiency is
reduced a bit, but for applications getting keyboard input for example
(word, excel etc) it means a whole lot smoother input/display.
One side effect of large quanta is even more incredible end to end slewing
when your'e using a mouse to navigate through a large spreadsheet.
Of couse large quanta make a lot of sense for a small number of i/o
intensive processes, but not terminal services.
Regards,
Rick
Ulrich Mack
rmack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Volante Systems
18 Heussler Terrace, Milton 4064
Queensland Australia
tel +61 7 32467704
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Madden [mailto:brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, 16 September 2003 6:33 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: thread quanta and chkroot.cmd thingy
So, after reading all these quanta things, does this setting really make a
difference?
I understand that Tim and/or Kevin are testing to see which setting is
better, but wouldn't it not really matter since an adverse setting would
only be impacted by what an administrator is actively running on the
console?
I would assume that this setting doesn't really matter in the real world?
Brian
Brian Madden
202.302.3657
brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--------
Visit www.brianmadden.com for thin client white papers, books, product
reviews, courseware, and training videos.
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Timothy Mangan
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 1:07 PM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: thread quanta and chkroot.cmd thingy
Simple test. The thread that owns the "foreground window" also gets a
priority boost. You can see this in the performance monitor. Start a
program (I like "regedit" because it only has one thread), bring up
performance monitor: Add counter Thread: Current Priority for the thread(s)
of the application to be tested. You will see the priority increase when
the window had the focus. Works as console of TS session.
tim
-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 9:28 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: thread quanta and chkroot.cmd thingy
Here is Kevin's response:
His answer has made me curious. I can prove who is right with a small test.
I'll let you know. Kevin Goodman CTO RTO Software
* +1-678-455-5506 x702
6 +1-678-455-5551*
kevin.goodman@xxxxxxxxxxx
Address: 5400 Laurel Springs Pkwy, #108 Suwanee, GA 30024 USA
http://www.rtosoft.com
Bernd Harzog
CEO
RTO Software, Inc.
bernd.harzog@xxxxxxxxxxx
678-455-5506 x701
www.rtosoft.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Oglesby [mailto:roglesby@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 9:22 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: thread quanta and chkroot.cmd thingy
Ok, no I have to allot some time today to test this.
Ron Oglesby
Senior Technical Architect
RapidApp
Office 312.372.7188
Mobile 815.325.7618
email roglesby@xxxxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Rogers [mailto:Andrew.Rogers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 8:12 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: thread quanta and chkroot.cmd thingy
Interesting, RTOSoft vs TMurgent - whos right?
You really know how to ask good questions Brian!! :)
Andrew
--o--
********************************************************
This Week's Sponsor: ThinPrint
http://www.thinprint.com
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thethin.net/links.cfm
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation mode use
the below link: http://thethin.net/citrixlist.cfm
********************************************************
This Week's Sponsor: ThinPrint
http://www.thinprint.com
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thethin.net/links.cfm
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation mode use
the below link: http://thethin.net/citrixlist.cfm
********************************************************
This Week's Sponsor: ThinPrint
http://www.thinprint.com
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thethin.net/links.cfm
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation mode use
the below link: http://thethin.net/citrixlist.cfm
********************************************************
This Week's Sponsor: ThinPrint
http://www.thinprint.com
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thethin.net/links.cfm
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation mode use
the below link: http://thethin.net/citrixlist.cfm
********************************************************
This Week's Sponsor: ThinPrint
http://www.thinprint.com
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thethin.net/links.cfm
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation mode use
the below link: http://thethin.net/citrixlist.cfm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be subject
to legal professional privilege. It is intended solely for the addressee.
If you receive this e-mail by mistake please promptly inform us by reply
e-mail and then delete the e-mail and destroy any printed copy. You must
not disclose or use in any way the information in the e-mail. There is no
warranty that this email or any attachment or message is error or virus
free. It may be a private
communication, and if so, does not represent the views of Volante group
Limited.
********************************************************
This Week's Sponsor: ThinPrint
http://www.thinprint.com
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thethin.net/links.cfm
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://thethin.net/citrixlist.cfm
Other related posts:
