假设我有一个4核CPU,我想在最短的时间内运行某个进程。这个过程在理想情况下是可并行的,所以我可以在无数个线程上运行它的块,每个线程花费相同的时间。
因为我有4个内核,所以我不期望通过运行比内核更多的线程来提高速度,因为单个内核在给定时刻只能运行单个线程。我对硬件了解不多,所以这只是一个猜测。
在更多的线程而不是核心上运行并行进程是否有好处?换句话说,如果我使用4000个线程而不是4个线程运行,我的进程会更快、更慢,还是在大约相同的时间内完成?
假设我有一个4核CPU,我想在最短的时间内运行某个进程。这个过程在理想情况下是可并行的,所以我可以在无数个线程上运行它的块,每个线程花费相同的时间。
因为我有4个内核,所以我不期望通过运行比内核更多的线程来提高速度,因为单个内核在给定时刻只能运行单个线程。我对硬件了解不多,所以这只是一个猜测。
在更多的线程而不是核心上运行并行进程是否有好处?换句话说,如果我使用4000个线程而不是4个线程运行,我的进程会更快、更慢,还是在大约相同的时间内完成?
当前回答
理想的情况是每个内核有一个线程,只要没有线程会阻塞。
在一种情况下,这可能是不正确的:有其他线程在核心上运行,在这种情况下,更多的线程可能会给您的程序更大的执行时间。
其他回答
一次4000个线程是相当高的。
答案是肯定的,也不是。如果您在每个线程中执行大量阻塞I/O,那么是的,您可以在每个逻辑核心中执行3或4个线程时显示显著的加速。
If you are not doing a lot of blocking things however, then the extra overhead with threading will just make it slower. So use a profiler and see where the bottlenecks are in each possibly parallel piece. If you are doing heavy computations, then more than 1 thread per CPU won't help. If you are doing a lot of memory transfer, it won't help either. If you are doing a lot of I/O though such as for disk access or internet access, then yes multiple threads will help up to a certain extent, or at the least make the application more responsive.
通过运行htop或ps命令(返回机器上的进程数),您将发现可以在机器上运行多少个线程。
您可以使用手册页关于'ps'命令。
man ps
如果你想计算所有用户进程的数量,你可以使用这些命令之一:
Ps -aux| wc -l ps -eLf | wc -l
计算用户进程数:
ps—root用户| wc -l
此外,你还可以使用“htop”[参考]:
在Ubuntu或Debian上安装:
sudo apt-get install htop
在Redhat或CentOS上安装:
yum install htop
dnf install htop [On Fedora 22+ releases]
如果您想从源代码编译htop,可以在这里找到它。
理想的情况是每个内核有一个线程,只要没有线程会阻塞。
在一种情况下,这可能是不正确的:有其他线程在核心上运行,在这种情况下,更多的线程可能会给您的程序更大的执行时间。
我知道这个问题很老了,但事情从2009年开始就有了变化。
现在有两件事需要考虑:核心的数量,以及每个核心中可以运行的线程的数量。
With Intel processors, the number of threads is defined by the Hyperthreading which is just 2 (when available). But Hyperthreading cuts your execution time by two, even when not using 2 threads! (i.e. 1 pipeline shared between two processes -- this is good when you have more processes, not so good otherwise. More cores are definitively better!) Note that modern CPUs generally have more pipelines to divide the workload, so it's no really divided by two anymore. But Hyperthreading still shares a lot of the CPU units between the two threads (some call those logical CPUs).
在其他处理器上,您可能有2、4甚至8个线程。因此,如果你有8个内核,每个内核支持8个线程,你可以有64个进程并行运行,而不需要上下文切换。
“没有上下文切换”显然是不正确的,如果你运行的是一个标准的操作系统,它会对各种你无法控制的事情进行上下文切换。但这是主要的思想。一些操作系统允许你分配处理器,这样只有你的应用程序可以访问/使用处理器!
From my own experience, if you have a lot of I/O, multiple threads is good. If you have very heavy memory intensive work (read source 1, read source 2, fast computation, write) then having more threads doesn't help. Again, this depends on how much data you read/write simultaneously (i.e. if you use SSE 4.2 and read 256 bits values, that stops all threads in their step... in other words, 1 thread is probably a lot easier to implement and probably nearly as speedy if not actually faster. This will depend on your process & memory architecture, some advanced servers manage separate memory ranges for separate cores so separate threads will be faster assuming your data is properly filed... which is why, on some architectures, 4 processes will run faster than 1 process with 4 threads.)
如果你的线程不做I/O,同步等,没有其他的运行,1个线程一个核可以让你获得最好的性能。然而,情况很可能并非如此。添加更多的线程通常会有所帮助,但在某种程度上,它们会导致性能下降。
Not long ago, I was doing performance testing on a 2 quad-core machine running an ASP.NET application on Mono under a pretty decent load. We played with the minimum and maximum number of threads and in the end we found out that for that particular application in that particular configuration the best throughput was somewhere between 36 and 40 threads. Anything outside those boundaries performed worse. Lesson learned? If I were you, I would test with different number of threads until you find the right number for your application.
有一件事是肯定的:4k线程将花费更长的时间。这有很多上下文转换。