7 Replies Latest reply on Jul 4, 2017 11:21 AM by bigtom

    Web Direct and CPU cores?

    bigtom

      Anyone have experience with WD and performance with different CPU arrangements? Is there any real difference with:

      • 12 core master
      • 3x 4 core workers
      • 2x 6 core workers

       

      Aside from the likelihood that 3x 4 core workers could be at faster speeds is there any benefit to a particular arrangement in actual production?

        • 1. Re: Web Direct and CPU cores?
          Johan Hedman

          Using FMS16 or other version of FMS?

          • 2. Re: Web Direct and CPU cores?
            wimdecorte

            Other variables like many PSoS sessions and/or many server-side schedules?  These would typically go a free core on the master, so if you have a lot of those going on, I would definitely leave the master to its own db engine / fmse engine and offload webd to workers.

             

            Same if you have a good number of concurrent users, doing a lot of finds; FMS will spread these over the cores on the master machine which may get interference if that machine is also dealing with a lot of webd sessions.

            1 of 1 people found this helpful
            • 3. Re: Web Direct and CPU cores?
              bigtom

              Just looking at this for WD users only.

               

              If the master is left to process PSOS are there any gains to having multiple workers if the overall cores are the same? I would guess that a benefit might be redundancy. If one worker had an issue others would continue to carry the load, but I am not sure what the master does if a worker is suddenly not available. Does it simply assume there is one less worker available?

              • 4. Re: Web Direct and CPU cores?
                bigtom

                Johan Hedman wrote:

                 

                Using FMS16 or other version of FMS?

                FMS16

                • 5. Re: Web Direct and CPU cores?
                  wimdecorte

                  I believe that would be the case; push comes to shove the master becomes the webd worker.

                   

                  Other than that; tough call to make without knowing the nature of the solution (and how it's designed).  The obvious is answer is "get the most fastest cores".

                   

                  If redundancy is not a big requirement then I would prefer fewer machines and make the machines as beefy as the budget allows.  Finding the balance between # of cores and clock-speed is never easy.  Do you have any existing metrics as a baseline?

                  • 6. Re: Web Direct and CPU cores?
                    bigtom

                    wimdecorte Nothing existing. All new solution. I have time for testing and it is not a terribly complex solution. Client has super high activity on Fridays when lots of data is entered and reports generated. Other days will have very little use. Looking at AWS for deployment and an idea to maximize the client $ is to start extra worker instances Friday morning and stop them Friday night. It would be great to get FMI stats somehow and use the AWS API to start/stop instances as needed based on load. Possibly total user count would me a measure, but if they are not active users...? Maybe I am asking too much.

                    • 7. Re: Web Direct and CPU cores?
                      bigtom

                      AWS VPC will also add complexity and costs so maybe not worth the effort.