MAXDOP Settings for SQL Server 2014MAXDOP setting algorithm for SQL ServerSQL Server recommended MAXDOP settings for NUMAMAXDOP setting algorithm for SQL ServerOracle GoldenGate add trandata errorsIdeal MAXDOP & CPUs - how to trace for parallel queries?MAXDOP query for SQL Server 2012Multi-instance SQL Server Standard Editon MaxDop settingsSQL Server MAXDOP , microsoft reommendationResource semaphore query compile waitsInvestigating errors from strange querySQL Server MAXDOP on VMWare Virtual Servers
Why don’t airliners have temporary liveries?
Will TSA allow me to carry a Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP)/sleep apnea device?
SF novella separating the dumb majority from the intelligent part of mankind
How to translate “Me doing X” like in online posts?
Cause of continuous spectral lines
How hard would it be to convert a glider into an powered electric aircraft?
How to make a setting relevant?
Do any instruments not produce overtones?
What happened to all the nuclear material being smuggled after the fall of the USSR?
PostgreSQL - Array of overlapping Polygon Ids
Segmentation fault and huge SRAM need for Serial.println
Can characters escape from Death House through this method?
What LISP compilers and interpreters were available for 8-bit machines?
How can drunken, homicidal elves successfully conduct a wild hunt?
When writing an error prompt, should we end the sentence with a exclamation mark or a dot?
Movie where a boy is transported into the future by an alien spaceship
Should I "tell" my exposition or give it through dialogue?
Select items in a list that contain criteria
How to make thick Asian sauces?
Why does the Schrödinger equation work so well for the Hydrogen atom despite the relativistic boundary at the nucleus?
Does Lightning Network has concept of continuous stream of value?
Payment instructions from HomeAway look fishy to me
Implement Homestuck's Catenative Doomsday Dice Cascader
Does an ice chest packed full of frozen food need ice?
MAXDOP Settings for SQL Server 2014
MAXDOP setting algorithm for SQL ServerSQL Server recommended MAXDOP settings for NUMAMAXDOP setting algorithm for SQL ServerOracle GoldenGate add trandata errorsIdeal MAXDOP & CPUs - how to trace for parallel queries?MAXDOP query for SQL Server 2012Multi-instance SQL Server Standard Editon MaxDop settingsSQL Server MAXDOP , microsoft reommendationResource semaphore query compile waitsInvestigating errors from strange querySQL Server MAXDOP on VMWare Virtual Servers
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
I know this question has been asked number of times and also has answers to it but, I still need a bit more guidance on this subject.
Below is the details of my CPU from SSMS:
Below is CPU tab from task manager of the DB Server:
I have kept the setting of MAXDOP
at 2 by following below formula:
declare @hyperthreadingRatio bit
declare @logicalCPUs int
declare @HTEnabled int
declare @physicalCPU int
declare @SOCKET int
declare @logicalCPUPerNuma int
declare @NoOfNUMA int
declare @MaxDOP int
select @logicalCPUs = cpu_count -- [Logical CPU Count]
,@hyperthreadingRatio = hyperthread_ratio -- [Hyperthread Ratio]
,@physicalCPU = cpu_count / hyperthread_ratio -- [Physical CPU Count]
,@HTEnabled = case
when cpu_count > hyperthread_ratio
then 1
else 0
end -- HTEnabled
from sys.dm_os_sys_info
option (recompile);
select @logicalCPUPerNuma = COUNT(parent_node_id) -- [NumberOfLogicalProcessorsPerNuma]
from sys.dm_os_schedulers
where [status] = 'VISIBLE ONLINE'
and parent_node_id < 64
group by parent_node_id
option (recompile);
select @NoOfNUMA = count(distinct parent_node_id)
from sys.dm_os_schedulers -- find NO OF NUMA Nodes
where [status] = 'VISIBLE ONLINE'
and parent_node_id < 64
IF @NoofNUMA > 1 AND @HTEnabled = 0
SET @MaxDOP= @logicalCPUPerNuma
ELSE IF @NoofNUMA > 1 AND @HTEnabled = 1
SET @MaxDOP=round( @NoofNUMA / @physicalCPU *1.0,0)
ELSE IF @HTEnabled = 0
SET @MaxDOP=@logicalCPUs
ELSE IF @HTEnabled = 1
SET @MaxDOP=@physicalCPU
IF @MaxDOP > 10
SET @MaxDOP=10
IF @MaxDOP = 0
SET @MaxDOP=1
PRINT 'logicalCPUs : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @logicalCPUs)
PRINT 'hyperthreadingRatio : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @hyperthreadingRatio)
PRINT 'physicalCPU : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @physicalCPU)
PRINT 'HTEnabled : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @HTEnabled)
PRINT 'logicalCPUPerNuma : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @logicalCPUPerNuma)
PRINT 'NoOfNUMA : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @NoOfNUMA)
PRINT '---------------------------'
Print 'MAXDOP setting should be : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @MaxDOP)
I am still seeing high wait times related to CXPACKET
. I am using below query to get that:
WITH [Waits] AS
(SELECT
[wait_type],
[wait_time_ms] / 1000.0 AS [WaitS],
([wait_time_ms] - [signal_wait_time_ms]) / 1000.0 AS [ResourceS],
[signal_wait_time_ms] / 1000.0 AS [SignalS],
[waiting_tasks_count] AS [WaitCount],
100.0 * [wait_time_ms] / SUM ([wait_time_ms]) OVER() AS [Percentage],
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY [wait_time_ms] DESC) AS [RowNum]
FROM sys.dm_os_wait_stats
WHERE [wait_type] NOT IN (
N'BROKER_EVENTHANDLER', N'BROKER_RECEIVE_WAITFOR',
N'BROKER_TASK_STOP', N'BROKER_TO_FLUSH',
N'BROKER_TRANSMITTER', N'CHECKPOINT_QUEUE',
N'CHKPT', N'CLR_AUTO_EVENT',
N'CLR_MANUAL_EVENT', N'CLR_SEMAPHORE',
N'DBMIRROR_DBM_EVENT', N'DBMIRROR_EVENTS_QUEUE',
N'DBMIRROR_WORKER_QUEUE', N'DBMIRRORING_CMD',
N'DIRTY_PAGE_POLL', N'DISPATCHER_QUEUE_SEMAPHORE',
N'EXECSYNC', N'FSAGENT',
N'FT_IFTS_SCHEDULER_IDLE_WAIT', N'FT_IFTSHC_MUTEX',
N'HADR_CLUSAPI_CALL', N'HADR_FILESTREAM_IOMGR_IOCOMPLETION',
N'HADR_LOGCAPTURE_WAIT', N'HADR_NOTIFICATION_DEQUEUE',
N'HADR_TIMER_TASK', N'HADR_WORK_QUEUE',
N'KSOURCE_WAKEUP', N'LAZYWRITER_SLEEP',
N'LOGMGR_QUEUE', N'ONDEMAND_TASK_QUEUE',
N'PWAIT_ALL_COMPONENTS_INITIALIZED',
N'QDS_PERSIST_TASK_MAIN_LOOP_SLEEP',
N'QDS_CLEANUP_STALE_QUERIES_TASK_MAIN_LOOP_SLEEP',
N'REQUEST_FOR_DEADLOCK_SEARCH', N'RESOURCE_QUEUE',
N'SERVER_IDLE_CHECK', N'SLEEP_BPOOL_FLUSH',
N'SLEEP_DBSTARTUP', N'SLEEP_DCOMSTARTUP',
N'SLEEP_MASTERDBREADY', N'SLEEP_MASTERMDREADY',
N'SLEEP_MASTERUPGRADED', N'SLEEP_MSDBSTARTUP',
N'SLEEP_SYSTEMTASK', N'SLEEP_TASK',
N'SLEEP_TEMPDBSTARTUP', N'SNI_HTTP_ACCEPT',
N'SP_SERVER_DIAGNOSTICS_SLEEP', N'SQLTRACE_BUFFER_FLUSH',
N'SQLTRACE_INCREMENTAL_FLUSH_SLEEP',
N'SQLTRACE_WAIT_ENTRIES', N'WAIT_FOR_RESULTS',
N'WAITFOR', N'WAITFOR_TASKSHUTDOWN',
N'WAIT_XTP_HOST_WAIT', N'WAIT_XTP_OFFLINE_CKPT_NEW_LOG',
N'WAIT_XTP_CKPT_CLOSE', N'XE_DISPATCHER_JOIN',
N'XE_DISPATCHER_WAIT', N'XE_TIMER_EVENT')
AND [waiting_tasks_count] > 0
)
SELECT
MAX ([W1].[wait_type]) AS [WaitType],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[WaitS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Wait_S],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[ResourceS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Resource_S],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[SignalS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Signal_S],
MAX ([W1].[WaitCount]) AS [WaitCount],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[Percentage]) AS DECIMAL (5,2)) AS [Percentage],
CAST ((MAX ([W1].[WaitS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgWait_S],
CAST ((MAX ([W1].[ResourceS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgRes_S],
CAST ((MAX ([W1].[SignalS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgSig_S]
FROM [Waits] AS [W1]
INNER JOIN [Waits] AS [W2]
ON [W2].[RowNum] <= [W1].[RowNum]
GROUP BY [W1].[RowNum]
HAVING SUM ([W2].[Percentage]) - MAX ([W1].[Percentage]) < 95; -- percentage threshold
GO
Currently CXPACKET
wait stands at 63% for my server:
I referred to multiple articles on the recommendation from experts and also looked at MAXDOP
suggestions by Microsoft; however, I am not really sure what should be the optimum value for this one.
I found one question on the same topic here however if I go with that suggestion by Kin then, MAXDOP
should be 4. In the same question, if we go with Max Vernon, it should be 3.
Kindly provide your valuable suggestion.
Version: Microsoft SQL Server 2014 (SP3) (KB4022619) - 12.0.6024.0
(X64) Sep 7 2018 01:37:51 Enterprise Edition: Core-based Licensing
(64-bit) on Windows NT 6.3 (Build 9600: ) (Hypervisor)
Cost Threshold for Parallelism is set at 70. CTfP has been set to 70 after testing the same for values ranging from default to 25 and 50 respectively. When it was default(5) and MAXDOP
was 0, wait time was close to 70% for CXPACKET
.
I executed sp_blitzfirst
for 60 seconds in the expert mode and below is the output for findings and wait stats:
sql-server sql-server-2014 configuration maxdop
add a comment |
I know this question has been asked number of times and also has answers to it but, I still need a bit more guidance on this subject.
Below is the details of my CPU from SSMS:
Below is CPU tab from task manager of the DB Server:
I have kept the setting of MAXDOP
at 2 by following below formula:
declare @hyperthreadingRatio bit
declare @logicalCPUs int
declare @HTEnabled int
declare @physicalCPU int
declare @SOCKET int
declare @logicalCPUPerNuma int
declare @NoOfNUMA int
declare @MaxDOP int
select @logicalCPUs = cpu_count -- [Logical CPU Count]
,@hyperthreadingRatio = hyperthread_ratio -- [Hyperthread Ratio]
,@physicalCPU = cpu_count / hyperthread_ratio -- [Physical CPU Count]
,@HTEnabled = case
when cpu_count > hyperthread_ratio
then 1
else 0
end -- HTEnabled
from sys.dm_os_sys_info
option (recompile);
select @logicalCPUPerNuma = COUNT(parent_node_id) -- [NumberOfLogicalProcessorsPerNuma]
from sys.dm_os_schedulers
where [status] = 'VISIBLE ONLINE'
and parent_node_id < 64
group by parent_node_id
option (recompile);
select @NoOfNUMA = count(distinct parent_node_id)
from sys.dm_os_schedulers -- find NO OF NUMA Nodes
where [status] = 'VISIBLE ONLINE'
and parent_node_id < 64
IF @NoofNUMA > 1 AND @HTEnabled = 0
SET @MaxDOP= @logicalCPUPerNuma
ELSE IF @NoofNUMA > 1 AND @HTEnabled = 1
SET @MaxDOP=round( @NoofNUMA / @physicalCPU *1.0,0)
ELSE IF @HTEnabled = 0
SET @MaxDOP=@logicalCPUs
ELSE IF @HTEnabled = 1
SET @MaxDOP=@physicalCPU
IF @MaxDOP > 10
SET @MaxDOP=10
IF @MaxDOP = 0
SET @MaxDOP=1
PRINT 'logicalCPUs : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @logicalCPUs)
PRINT 'hyperthreadingRatio : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @hyperthreadingRatio)
PRINT 'physicalCPU : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @physicalCPU)
PRINT 'HTEnabled : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @HTEnabled)
PRINT 'logicalCPUPerNuma : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @logicalCPUPerNuma)
PRINT 'NoOfNUMA : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @NoOfNUMA)
PRINT '---------------------------'
Print 'MAXDOP setting should be : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @MaxDOP)
I am still seeing high wait times related to CXPACKET
. I am using below query to get that:
WITH [Waits] AS
(SELECT
[wait_type],
[wait_time_ms] / 1000.0 AS [WaitS],
([wait_time_ms] - [signal_wait_time_ms]) / 1000.0 AS [ResourceS],
[signal_wait_time_ms] / 1000.0 AS [SignalS],
[waiting_tasks_count] AS [WaitCount],
100.0 * [wait_time_ms] / SUM ([wait_time_ms]) OVER() AS [Percentage],
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY [wait_time_ms] DESC) AS [RowNum]
FROM sys.dm_os_wait_stats
WHERE [wait_type] NOT IN (
N'BROKER_EVENTHANDLER', N'BROKER_RECEIVE_WAITFOR',
N'BROKER_TASK_STOP', N'BROKER_TO_FLUSH',
N'BROKER_TRANSMITTER', N'CHECKPOINT_QUEUE',
N'CHKPT', N'CLR_AUTO_EVENT',
N'CLR_MANUAL_EVENT', N'CLR_SEMAPHORE',
N'DBMIRROR_DBM_EVENT', N'DBMIRROR_EVENTS_QUEUE',
N'DBMIRROR_WORKER_QUEUE', N'DBMIRRORING_CMD',
N'DIRTY_PAGE_POLL', N'DISPATCHER_QUEUE_SEMAPHORE',
N'EXECSYNC', N'FSAGENT',
N'FT_IFTS_SCHEDULER_IDLE_WAIT', N'FT_IFTSHC_MUTEX',
N'HADR_CLUSAPI_CALL', N'HADR_FILESTREAM_IOMGR_IOCOMPLETION',
N'HADR_LOGCAPTURE_WAIT', N'HADR_NOTIFICATION_DEQUEUE',
N'HADR_TIMER_TASK', N'HADR_WORK_QUEUE',
N'KSOURCE_WAKEUP', N'LAZYWRITER_SLEEP',
N'LOGMGR_QUEUE', N'ONDEMAND_TASK_QUEUE',
N'PWAIT_ALL_COMPONENTS_INITIALIZED',
N'QDS_PERSIST_TASK_MAIN_LOOP_SLEEP',
N'QDS_CLEANUP_STALE_QUERIES_TASK_MAIN_LOOP_SLEEP',
N'REQUEST_FOR_DEADLOCK_SEARCH', N'RESOURCE_QUEUE',
N'SERVER_IDLE_CHECK', N'SLEEP_BPOOL_FLUSH',
N'SLEEP_DBSTARTUP', N'SLEEP_DCOMSTARTUP',
N'SLEEP_MASTERDBREADY', N'SLEEP_MASTERMDREADY',
N'SLEEP_MASTERUPGRADED', N'SLEEP_MSDBSTARTUP',
N'SLEEP_SYSTEMTASK', N'SLEEP_TASK',
N'SLEEP_TEMPDBSTARTUP', N'SNI_HTTP_ACCEPT',
N'SP_SERVER_DIAGNOSTICS_SLEEP', N'SQLTRACE_BUFFER_FLUSH',
N'SQLTRACE_INCREMENTAL_FLUSH_SLEEP',
N'SQLTRACE_WAIT_ENTRIES', N'WAIT_FOR_RESULTS',
N'WAITFOR', N'WAITFOR_TASKSHUTDOWN',
N'WAIT_XTP_HOST_WAIT', N'WAIT_XTP_OFFLINE_CKPT_NEW_LOG',
N'WAIT_XTP_CKPT_CLOSE', N'XE_DISPATCHER_JOIN',
N'XE_DISPATCHER_WAIT', N'XE_TIMER_EVENT')
AND [waiting_tasks_count] > 0
)
SELECT
MAX ([W1].[wait_type]) AS [WaitType],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[WaitS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Wait_S],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[ResourceS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Resource_S],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[SignalS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Signal_S],
MAX ([W1].[WaitCount]) AS [WaitCount],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[Percentage]) AS DECIMAL (5,2)) AS [Percentage],
CAST ((MAX ([W1].[WaitS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgWait_S],
CAST ((MAX ([W1].[ResourceS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgRes_S],
CAST ((MAX ([W1].[SignalS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgSig_S]
FROM [Waits] AS [W1]
INNER JOIN [Waits] AS [W2]
ON [W2].[RowNum] <= [W1].[RowNum]
GROUP BY [W1].[RowNum]
HAVING SUM ([W2].[Percentage]) - MAX ([W1].[Percentage]) < 95; -- percentage threshold
GO
Currently CXPACKET
wait stands at 63% for my server:
I referred to multiple articles on the recommendation from experts and also looked at MAXDOP
suggestions by Microsoft; however, I am not really sure what should be the optimum value for this one.
I found one question on the same topic here however if I go with that suggestion by Kin then, MAXDOP
should be 4. In the same question, if we go with Max Vernon, it should be 3.
Kindly provide your valuable suggestion.
Version: Microsoft SQL Server 2014 (SP3) (KB4022619) - 12.0.6024.0
(X64) Sep 7 2018 01:37:51 Enterprise Edition: Core-based Licensing
(64-bit) on Windows NT 6.3 (Build 9600: ) (Hypervisor)
Cost Threshold for Parallelism is set at 70. CTfP has been set to 70 after testing the same for values ranging from default to 25 and 50 respectively. When it was default(5) and MAXDOP
was 0, wait time was close to 70% for CXPACKET
.
I executed sp_blitzfirst
for 60 seconds in the expert mode and below is the output for findings and wait stats:
sql-server sql-server-2014 configuration maxdop
I agree with @JaredKarney 's comment in his answer: What are you trying to fix/solve? Are you encountering bad performance? Why do you believe that a high CXPACKET wait is bad? Could you please elaborate on why your situation is different than all the other questions and answers regarding this issue?
– hot2use
Mar 25 at 15:42
@hot2use Yes, I am having performance issue and trying to see all possible aspects which could deteriorate performance. I am not expert on CXPACKET wait stats and hence wanted to have some guidance from experts.
– Learning_DBAdmin
Mar 25 at 17:23
add a comment |
I know this question has been asked number of times and also has answers to it but, I still need a bit more guidance on this subject.
Below is the details of my CPU from SSMS:
Below is CPU tab from task manager of the DB Server:
I have kept the setting of MAXDOP
at 2 by following below formula:
declare @hyperthreadingRatio bit
declare @logicalCPUs int
declare @HTEnabled int
declare @physicalCPU int
declare @SOCKET int
declare @logicalCPUPerNuma int
declare @NoOfNUMA int
declare @MaxDOP int
select @logicalCPUs = cpu_count -- [Logical CPU Count]
,@hyperthreadingRatio = hyperthread_ratio -- [Hyperthread Ratio]
,@physicalCPU = cpu_count / hyperthread_ratio -- [Physical CPU Count]
,@HTEnabled = case
when cpu_count > hyperthread_ratio
then 1
else 0
end -- HTEnabled
from sys.dm_os_sys_info
option (recompile);
select @logicalCPUPerNuma = COUNT(parent_node_id) -- [NumberOfLogicalProcessorsPerNuma]
from sys.dm_os_schedulers
where [status] = 'VISIBLE ONLINE'
and parent_node_id < 64
group by parent_node_id
option (recompile);
select @NoOfNUMA = count(distinct parent_node_id)
from sys.dm_os_schedulers -- find NO OF NUMA Nodes
where [status] = 'VISIBLE ONLINE'
and parent_node_id < 64
IF @NoofNUMA > 1 AND @HTEnabled = 0
SET @MaxDOP= @logicalCPUPerNuma
ELSE IF @NoofNUMA > 1 AND @HTEnabled = 1
SET @MaxDOP=round( @NoofNUMA / @physicalCPU *1.0,0)
ELSE IF @HTEnabled = 0
SET @MaxDOP=@logicalCPUs
ELSE IF @HTEnabled = 1
SET @MaxDOP=@physicalCPU
IF @MaxDOP > 10
SET @MaxDOP=10
IF @MaxDOP = 0
SET @MaxDOP=1
PRINT 'logicalCPUs : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @logicalCPUs)
PRINT 'hyperthreadingRatio : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @hyperthreadingRatio)
PRINT 'physicalCPU : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @physicalCPU)
PRINT 'HTEnabled : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @HTEnabled)
PRINT 'logicalCPUPerNuma : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @logicalCPUPerNuma)
PRINT 'NoOfNUMA : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @NoOfNUMA)
PRINT '---------------------------'
Print 'MAXDOP setting should be : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @MaxDOP)
I am still seeing high wait times related to CXPACKET
. I am using below query to get that:
WITH [Waits] AS
(SELECT
[wait_type],
[wait_time_ms] / 1000.0 AS [WaitS],
([wait_time_ms] - [signal_wait_time_ms]) / 1000.0 AS [ResourceS],
[signal_wait_time_ms] / 1000.0 AS [SignalS],
[waiting_tasks_count] AS [WaitCount],
100.0 * [wait_time_ms] / SUM ([wait_time_ms]) OVER() AS [Percentage],
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY [wait_time_ms] DESC) AS [RowNum]
FROM sys.dm_os_wait_stats
WHERE [wait_type] NOT IN (
N'BROKER_EVENTHANDLER', N'BROKER_RECEIVE_WAITFOR',
N'BROKER_TASK_STOP', N'BROKER_TO_FLUSH',
N'BROKER_TRANSMITTER', N'CHECKPOINT_QUEUE',
N'CHKPT', N'CLR_AUTO_EVENT',
N'CLR_MANUAL_EVENT', N'CLR_SEMAPHORE',
N'DBMIRROR_DBM_EVENT', N'DBMIRROR_EVENTS_QUEUE',
N'DBMIRROR_WORKER_QUEUE', N'DBMIRRORING_CMD',
N'DIRTY_PAGE_POLL', N'DISPATCHER_QUEUE_SEMAPHORE',
N'EXECSYNC', N'FSAGENT',
N'FT_IFTS_SCHEDULER_IDLE_WAIT', N'FT_IFTSHC_MUTEX',
N'HADR_CLUSAPI_CALL', N'HADR_FILESTREAM_IOMGR_IOCOMPLETION',
N'HADR_LOGCAPTURE_WAIT', N'HADR_NOTIFICATION_DEQUEUE',
N'HADR_TIMER_TASK', N'HADR_WORK_QUEUE',
N'KSOURCE_WAKEUP', N'LAZYWRITER_SLEEP',
N'LOGMGR_QUEUE', N'ONDEMAND_TASK_QUEUE',
N'PWAIT_ALL_COMPONENTS_INITIALIZED',
N'QDS_PERSIST_TASK_MAIN_LOOP_SLEEP',
N'QDS_CLEANUP_STALE_QUERIES_TASK_MAIN_LOOP_SLEEP',
N'REQUEST_FOR_DEADLOCK_SEARCH', N'RESOURCE_QUEUE',
N'SERVER_IDLE_CHECK', N'SLEEP_BPOOL_FLUSH',
N'SLEEP_DBSTARTUP', N'SLEEP_DCOMSTARTUP',
N'SLEEP_MASTERDBREADY', N'SLEEP_MASTERMDREADY',
N'SLEEP_MASTERUPGRADED', N'SLEEP_MSDBSTARTUP',
N'SLEEP_SYSTEMTASK', N'SLEEP_TASK',
N'SLEEP_TEMPDBSTARTUP', N'SNI_HTTP_ACCEPT',
N'SP_SERVER_DIAGNOSTICS_SLEEP', N'SQLTRACE_BUFFER_FLUSH',
N'SQLTRACE_INCREMENTAL_FLUSH_SLEEP',
N'SQLTRACE_WAIT_ENTRIES', N'WAIT_FOR_RESULTS',
N'WAITFOR', N'WAITFOR_TASKSHUTDOWN',
N'WAIT_XTP_HOST_WAIT', N'WAIT_XTP_OFFLINE_CKPT_NEW_LOG',
N'WAIT_XTP_CKPT_CLOSE', N'XE_DISPATCHER_JOIN',
N'XE_DISPATCHER_WAIT', N'XE_TIMER_EVENT')
AND [waiting_tasks_count] > 0
)
SELECT
MAX ([W1].[wait_type]) AS [WaitType],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[WaitS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Wait_S],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[ResourceS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Resource_S],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[SignalS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Signal_S],
MAX ([W1].[WaitCount]) AS [WaitCount],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[Percentage]) AS DECIMAL (5,2)) AS [Percentage],
CAST ((MAX ([W1].[WaitS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgWait_S],
CAST ((MAX ([W1].[ResourceS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgRes_S],
CAST ((MAX ([W1].[SignalS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgSig_S]
FROM [Waits] AS [W1]
INNER JOIN [Waits] AS [W2]
ON [W2].[RowNum] <= [W1].[RowNum]
GROUP BY [W1].[RowNum]
HAVING SUM ([W2].[Percentage]) - MAX ([W1].[Percentage]) < 95; -- percentage threshold
GO
Currently CXPACKET
wait stands at 63% for my server:
I referred to multiple articles on the recommendation from experts and also looked at MAXDOP
suggestions by Microsoft; however, I am not really sure what should be the optimum value for this one.
I found one question on the same topic here however if I go with that suggestion by Kin then, MAXDOP
should be 4. In the same question, if we go with Max Vernon, it should be 3.
Kindly provide your valuable suggestion.
Version: Microsoft SQL Server 2014 (SP3) (KB4022619) - 12.0.6024.0
(X64) Sep 7 2018 01:37:51 Enterprise Edition: Core-based Licensing
(64-bit) on Windows NT 6.3 (Build 9600: ) (Hypervisor)
Cost Threshold for Parallelism is set at 70. CTfP has been set to 70 after testing the same for values ranging from default to 25 and 50 respectively. When it was default(5) and MAXDOP
was 0, wait time was close to 70% for CXPACKET
.
I executed sp_blitzfirst
for 60 seconds in the expert mode and below is the output for findings and wait stats:
sql-server sql-server-2014 configuration maxdop
I know this question has been asked number of times and also has answers to it but, I still need a bit more guidance on this subject.
Below is the details of my CPU from SSMS:
Below is CPU tab from task manager of the DB Server:
I have kept the setting of MAXDOP
at 2 by following below formula:
declare @hyperthreadingRatio bit
declare @logicalCPUs int
declare @HTEnabled int
declare @physicalCPU int
declare @SOCKET int
declare @logicalCPUPerNuma int
declare @NoOfNUMA int
declare @MaxDOP int
select @logicalCPUs = cpu_count -- [Logical CPU Count]
,@hyperthreadingRatio = hyperthread_ratio -- [Hyperthread Ratio]
,@physicalCPU = cpu_count / hyperthread_ratio -- [Physical CPU Count]
,@HTEnabled = case
when cpu_count > hyperthread_ratio
then 1
else 0
end -- HTEnabled
from sys.dm_os_sys_info
option (recompile);
select @logicalCPUPerNuma = COUNT(parent_node_id) -- [NumberOfLogicalProcessorsPerNuma]
from sys.dm_os_schedulers
where [status] = 'VISIBLE ONLINE'
and parent_node_id < 64
group by parent_node_id
option (recompile);
select @NoOfNUMA = count(distinct parent_node_id)
from sys.dm_os_schedulers -- find NO OF NUMA Nodes
where [status] = 'VISIBLE ONLINE'
and parent_node_id < 64
IF @NoofNUMA > 1 AND @HTEnabled = 0
SET @MaxDOP= @logicalCPUPerNuma
ELSE IF @NoofNUMA > 1 AND @HTEnabled = 1
SET @MaxDOP=round( @NoofNUMA / @physicalCPU *1.0,0)
ELSE IF @HTEnabled = 0
SET @MaxDOP=@logicalCPUs
ELSE IF @HTEnabled = 1
SET @MaxDOP=@physicalCPU
IF @MaxDOP > 10
SET @MaxDOP=10
IF @MaxDOP = 0
SET @MaxDOP=1
PRINT 'logicalCPUs : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @logicalCPUs)
PRINT 'hyperthreadingRatio : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @hyperthreadingRatio)
PRINT 'physicalCPU : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @physicalCPU)
PRINT 'HTEnabled : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @HTEnabled)
PRINT 'logicalCPUPerNuma : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @logicalCPUPerNuma)
PRINT 'NoOfNUMA : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @NoOfNUMA)
PRINT '---------------------------'
Print 'MAXDOP setting should be : ' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @MaxDOP)
I am still seeing high wait times related to CXPACKET
. I am using below query to get that:
WITH [Waits] AS
(SELECT
[wait_type],
[wait_time_ms] / 1000.0 AS [WaitS],
([wait_time_ms] - [signal_wait_time_ms]) / 1000.0 AS [ResourceS],
[signal_wait_time_ms] / 1000.0 AS [SignalS],
[waiting_tasks_count] AS [WaitCount],
100.0 * [wait_time_ms] / SUM ([wait_time_ms]) OVER() AS [Percentage],
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY [wait_time_ms] DESC) AS [RowNum]
FROM sys.dm_os_wait_stats
WHERE [wait_type] NOT IN (
N'BROKER_EVENTHANDLER', N'BROKER_RECEIVE_WAITFOR',
N'BROKER_TASK_STOP', N'BROKER_TO_FLUSH',
N'BROKER_TRANSMITTER', N'CHECKPOINT_QUEUE',
N'CHKPT', N'CLR_AUTO_EVENT',
N'CLR_MANUAL_EVENT', N'CLR_SEMAPHORE',
N'DBMIRROR_DBM_EVENT', N'DBMIRROR_EVENTS_QUEUE',
N'DBMIRROR_WORKER_QUEUE', N'DBMIRRORING_CMD',
N'DIRTY_PAGE_POLL', N'DISPATCHER_QUEUE_SEMAPHORE',
N'EXECSYNC', N'FSAGENT',
N'FT_IFTS_SCHEDULER_IDLE_WAIT', N'FT_IFTSHC_MUTEX',
N'HADR_CLUSAPI_CALL', N'HADR_FILESTREAM_IOMGR_IOCOMPLETION',
N'HADR_LOGCAPTURE_WAIT', N'HADR_NOTIFICATION_DEQUEUE',
N'HADR_TIMER_TASK', N'HADR_WORK_QUEUE',
N'KSOURCE_WAKEUP', N'LAZYWRITER_SLEEP',
N'LOGMGR_QUEUE', N'ONDEMAND_TASK_QUEUE',
N'PWAIT_ALL_COMPONENTS_INITIALIZED',
N'QDS_PERSIST_TASK_MAIN_LOOP_SLEEP',
N'QDS_CLEANUP_STALE_QUERIES_TASK_MAIN_LOOP_SLEEP',
N'REQUEST_FOR_DEADLOCK_SEARCH', N'RESOURCE_QUEUE',
N'SERVER_IDLE_CHECK', N'SLEEP_BPOOL_FLUSH',
N'SLEEP_DBSTARTUP', N'SLEEP_DCOMSTARTUP',
N'SLEEP_MASTERDBREADY', N'SLEEP_MASTERMDREADY',
N'SLEEP_MASTERUPGRADED', N'SLEEP_MSDBSTARTUP',
N'SLEEP_SYSTEMTASK', N'SLEEP_TASK',
N'SLEEP_TEMPDBSTARTUP', N'SNI_HTTP_ACCEPT',
N'SP_SERVER_DIAGNOSTICS_SLEEP', N'SQLTRACE_BUFFER_FLUSH',
N'SQLTRACE_INCREMENTAL_FLUSH_SLEEP',
N'SQLTRACE_WAIT_ENTRIES', N'WAIT_FOR_RESULTS',
N'WAITFOR', N'WAITFOR_TASKSHUTDOWN',
N'WAIT_XTP_HOST_WAIT', N'WAIT_XTP_OFFLINE_CKPT_NEW_LOG',
N'WAIT_XTP_CKPT_CLOSE', N'XE_DISPATCHER_JOIN',
N'XE_DISPATCHER_WAIT', N'XE_TIMER_EVENT')
AND [waiting_tasks_count] > 0
)
SELECT
MAX ([W1].[wait_type]) AS [WaitType],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[WaitS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Wait_S],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[ResourceS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Resource_S],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[SignalS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Signal_S],
MAX ([W1].[WaitCount]) AS [WaitCount],
CAST (MAX ([W1].[Percentage]) AS DECIMAL (5,2)) AS [Percentage],
CAST ((MAX ([W1].[WaitS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgWait_S],
CAST ((MAX ([W1].[ResourceS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgRes_S],
CAST ((MAX ([W1].[SignalS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgSig_S]
FROM [Waits] AS [W1]
INNER JOIN [Waits] AS [W2]
ON [W2].[RowNum] <= [W1].[RowNum]
GROUP BY [W1].[RowNum]
HAVING SUM ([W2].[Percentage]) - MAX ([W1].[Percentage]) < 95; -- percentage threshold
GO
Currently CXPACKET
wait stands at 63% for my server:
I referred to multiple articles on the recommendation from experts and also looked at MAXDOP
suggestions by Microsoft; however, I am not really sure what should be the optimum value for this one.
I found one question on the same topic here however if I go with that suggestion by Kin then, MAXDOP
should be 4. In the same question, if we go with Max Vernon, it should be 3.
Kindly provide your valuable suggestion.
Version: Microsoft SQL Server 2014 (SP3) (KB4022619) - 12.0.6024.0
(X64) Sep 7 2018 01:37:51 Enterprise Edition: Core-based Licensing
(64-bit) on Windows NT 6.3 (Build 9600: ) (Hypervisor)
Cost Threshold for Parallelism is set at 70. CTfP has been set to 70 after testing the same for values ranging from default to 25 and 50 respectively. When it was default(5) and MAXDOP
was 0, wait time was close to 70% for CXPACKET
.
I executed sp_blitzfirst
for 60 seconds in the expert mode and below is the output for findings and wait stats:
sql-server sql-server-2014 configuration maxdop
sql-server sql-server-2014 configuration maxdop
edited Mar 25 at 14:22
Paul White♦
55.6k14292465
55.6k14292465
asked Mar 24 at 11:59
Learning_DBAdminLearning_DBAdmin
1,055219
1,055219
I agree with @JaredKarney 's comment in his answer: What are you trying to fix/solve? Are you encountering bad performance? Why do you believe that a high CXPACKET wait is bad? Could you please elaborate on why your situation is different than all the other questions and answers regarding this issue?
– hot2use
Mar 25 at 15:42
@hot2use Yes, I am having performance issue and trying to see all possible aspects which could deteriorate performance. I am not expert on CXPACKET wait stats and hence wanted to have some guidance from experts.
– Learning_DBAdmin
Mar 25 at 17:23
add a comment |
I agree with @JaredKarney 's comment in his answer: What are you trying to fix/solve? Are you encountering bad performance? Why do you believe that a high CXPACKET wait is bad? Could you please elaborate on why your situation is different than all the other questions and answers regarding this issue?
– hot2use
Mar 25 at 15:42
@hot2use Yes, I am having performance issue and trying to see all possible aspects which could deteriorate performance. I am not expert on CXPACKET wait stats and hence wanted to have some guidance from experts.
– Learning_DBAdmin
Mar 25 at 17:23
I agree with @JaredKarney 's comment in his answer: What are you trying to fix/solve? Are you encountering bad performance? Why do you believe that a high CXPACKET wait is bad? Could you please elaborate on why your situation is different than all the other questions and answers regarding this issue?
– hot2use
Mar 25 at 15:42
I agree with @JaredKarney 's comment in his answer: What are you trying to fix/solve? Are you encountering bad performance? Why do you believe that a high CXPACKET wait is bad? Could you please elaborate on why your situation is different than all the other questions and answers regarding this issue?
– hot2use
Mar 25 at 15:42
@hot2use Yes, I am having performance issue and trying to see all possible aspects which could deteriorate performance. I am not expert on CXPACKET wait stats and hence wanted to have some guidance from experts.
– Learning_DBAdmin
Mar 25 at 17:23
@hot2use Yes, I am having performance issue and trying to see all possible aspects which could deteriorate performance. I am not expert on CXPACKET wait stats and hence wanted to have some guidance from experts.
– Learning_DBAdmin
Mar 25 at 17:23
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Bogus
Here's why that wait stats report stinks: It doesn't tell you how long the server has been up.
I can see it in your screenshot of CPU time: 55 days!
Alright, so let's do some math.
Math
There are 86,400 seconds in day.
SELECT (86400 * 55) seconds_in_55_days
The answer there? 4,752,000
You have a total of 452,488
seconds of CXPACKET.
SELECT 4752000 / 452488 AS oh_yeah_that_axis
Which gives you... 10 (it's closer to 9.5 if you do actual math, here).
So while CXPACKET might be 62% of your server's waits, it's only happening about 10% of the time.
Leave It Alone
You've made the right adjustments to settings, it's time to do actual query and index tuning if you want to change the numbers in a meaningful way.
Other considerations
CXPACKET may arise from skewed parallelism:
More on CXPACKET Waits: Skewed Parallelism
On newer versions, it may surface as CXCONSUMER:
- CXCONSUMER Is Harmless? Not So Fast, Tiger.
Absent a third party monitoring tool, it may be worth capturing wait stats on your own:
- Capturing wait statistics for a period of time
- How to Capture Baselines with sp_BlitzFirst
add a comment |
Wait stats are just numbers. If your server is doing anything at all then you'll likely to have some kind of waits appear. Also, by definition there must be one wait which will have the highest percent. That doesn't mean anything without some kind of normalization. Your server has been up for 55 days if I'm reading the output of task manager correctly. That means that you only have 452000/(55*86400) = 0.095 wait seconds of CXPACKET
per second overall. In addition, since you're on SQL Server 2014 your CXPACKET
waits include both benign parallel waits and actionable waits. See Making parallelism waits actionable for more details. I would not jump to a conclusion that MAXDOP
is set incorrectly based on what you have presented here.
I would first measure throughput. Is there actually a problem here? We can't tell you how to do that because it depends on your workload. For an OLTP system you might measure transactions per second. For an ETL, you might measure rows loaded per second, and so on.
If you do have a problem and system performance needs to be improved I would then check CPU during times when you experience that problem. If CPU is too high then you probably need to tune your queries, increase server resources, or reduce the total number of active queries. If CPU is too low then you may again need to tune your queries, increase the total number of active queries, or there might be some wait type that's responsible.
If you do elect to look at wait stats, you should look at them only during the period in which you're experiencing a performance problem. Looking at global wait stats over the past 55 days simply is not actionable in almost all cases. It adds unnecessary noise to the data that makes your job harder.
Once you've completed a proper investigation it is possible that changing MAXDOP
will help you. For a server of your size I would stick to MAXDOP
1, 2, 4, or 8. We cannot tell you which of those will be best for your workload. You need to monitor your throughput before and after changing MAXDOP
to make a conclusion.
add a comment |
Your 'starting' maxdop should be 4; smallest number of cores per numa node up to 8. Your formula is incorrect.
High percentage of waits for a particular type means nothing. Everything in SQL waits, so something is always the highest. The ONLY thing high cxpacket waits means is that you have a high percentage of parallelism going on. CPU doesn't look high overall (at least for the snapshot provided), so probably not a problem.
Before ever trying to solve a problem, define the problem. What problem are you trying to solve? In this case, it seems you've defined the problem as high percentage of cxpacket waits, but that in and of itself is not a problem.
Virtual NUMA could easily have 2 cores per numa node. Why do you claim 4 is the smallest number of cores per numa node? Can you explain what you mean?
– Max Vernon
Mar 25 at 15:00
add a comment |
I think the most pertinent question is...are you actually experiencing any performance issues? If the answer is no, then why are you looking for a problem when there isn't one?
Like the other answers have said, everything waits, and all CX waits indicate is if you have queries going parallel, something I will mention is maybe you should look at what your cost threshold for parallelism is set at IF you are having issues with the queries that are going parallel ie small queries that aren't performing a lot of work going parallel and that is possibly making them run worse, not better, and large queries that should be going parallel are being delayed because of all the smaller ones that are running poorly.
If not then, you don't have a problem stop trying to create one.
Please read the question completely, cost threshold for parallelism is provided.
– Learning_DBAdmin
Mar 31 at 3:41
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "182"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f232943%2fmaxdop-settings-for-sql-server-2014%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Bogus
Here's why that wait stats report stinks: It doesn't tell you how long the server has been up.
I can see it in your screenshot of CPU time: 55 days!
Alright, so let's do some math.
Math
There are 86,400 seconds in day.
SELECT (86400 * 55) seconds_in_55_days
The answer there? 4,752,000
You have a total of 452,488
seconds of CXPACKET.
SELECT 4752000 / 452488 AS oh_yeah_that_axis
Which gives you... 10 (it's closer to 9.5 if you do actual math, here).
So while CXPACKET might be 62% of your server's waits, it's only happening about 10% of the time.
Leave It Alone
You've made the right adjustments to settings, it's time to do actual query and index tuning if you want to change the numbers in a meaningful way.
Other considerations
CXPACKET may arise from skewed parallelism:
More on CXPACKET Waits: Skewed Parallelism
On newer versions, it may surface as CXCONSUMER:
- CXCONSUMER Is Harmless? Not So Fast, Tiger.
Absent a third party monitoring tool, it may be worth capturing wait stats on your own:
- Capturing wait statistics for a period of time
- How to Capture Baselines with sp_BlitzFirst
add a comment |
Bogus
Here's why that wait stats report stinks: It doesn't tell you how long the server has been up.
I can see it in your screenshot of CPU time: 55 days!
Alright, so let's do some math.
Math
There are 86,400 seconds in day.
SELECT (86400 * 55) seconds_in_55_days
The answer there? 4,752,000
You have a total of 452,488
seconds of CXPACKET.
SELECT 4752000 / 452488 AS oh_yeah_that_axis
Which gives you... 10 (it's closer to 9.5 if you do actual math, here).
So while CXPACKET might be 62% of your server's waits, it's only happening about 10% of the time.
Leave It Alone
You've made the right adjustments to settings, it's time to do actual query and index tuning if you want to change the numbers in a meaningful way.
Other considerations
CXPACKET may arise from skewed parallelism:
More on CXPACKET Waits: Skewed Parallelism
On newer versions, it may surface as CXCONSUMER:
- CXCONSUMER Is Harmless? Not So Fast, Tiger.
Absent a third party monitoring tool, it may be worth capturing wait stats on your own:
- Capturing wait statistics for a period of time
- How to Capture Baselines with sp_BlitzFirst
add a comment |
Bogus
Here's why that wait stats report stinks: It doesn't tell you how long the server has been up.
I can see it in your screenshot of CPU time: 55 days!
Alright, so let's do some math.
Math
There are 86,400 seconds in day.
SELECT (86400 * 55) seconds_in_55_days
The answer there? 4,752,000
You have a total of 452,488
seconds of CXPACKET.
SELECT 4752000 / 452488 AS oh_yeah_that_axis
Which gives you... 10 (it's closer to 9.5 if you do actual math, here).
So while CXPACKET might be 62% of your server's waits, it's only happening about 10% of the time.
Leave It Alone
You've made the right adjustments to settings, it's time to do actual query and index tuning if you want to change the numbers in a meaningful way.
Other considerations
CXPACKET may arise from skewed parallelism:
More on CXPACKET Waits: Skewed Parallelism
On newer versions, it may surface as CXCONSUMER:
- CXCONSUMER Is Harmless? Not So Fast, Tiger.
Absent a third party monitoring tool, it may be worth capturing wait stats on your own:
- Capturing wait statistics for a period of time
- How to Capture Baselines with sp_BlitzFirst
Bogus
Here's why that wait stats report stinks: It doesn't tell you how long the server has been up.
I can see it in your screenshot of CPU time: 55 days!
Alright, so let's do some math.
Math
There are 86,400 seconds in day.
SELECT (86400 * 55) seconds_in_55_days
The answer there? 4,752,000
You have a total of 452,488
seconds of CXPACKET.
SELECT 4752000 / 452488 AS oh_yeah_that_axis
Which gives you... 10 (it's closer to 9.5 if you do actual math, here).
So while CXPACKET might be 62% of your server's waits, it's only happening about 10% of the time.
Leave It Alone
You've made the right adjustments to settings, it's time to do actual query and index tuning if you want to change the numbers in a meaningful way.
Other considerations
CXPACKET may arise from skewed parallelism:
More on CXPACKET Waits: Skewed Parallelism
On newer versions, it may surface as CXCONSUMER:
- CXCONSUMER Is Harmless? Not So Fast, Tiger.
Absent a third party monitoring tool, it may be worth capturing wait stats on your own:
- Capturing wait statistics for a period of time
- How to Capture Baselines with sp_BlitzFirst
edited Mar 24 at 23:43
answered Mar 24 at 14:24
Erik DarlingErik Darling
23.8k1375120
23.8k1375120
add a comment |
add a comment |
Wait stats are just numbers. If your server is doing anything at all then you'll likely to have some kind of waits appear. Also, by definition there must be one wait which will have the highest percent. That doesn't mean anything without some kind of normalization. Your server has been up for 55 days if I'm reading the output of task manager correctly. That means that you only have 452000/(55*86400) = 0.095 wait seconds of CXPACKET
per second overall. In addition, since you're on SQL Server 2014 your CXPACKET
waits include both benign parallel waits and actionable waits. See Making parallelism waits actionable for more details. I would not jump to a conclusion that MAXDOP
is set incorrectly based on what you have presented here.
I would first measure throughput. Is there actually a problem here? We can't tell you how to do that because it depends on your workload. For an OLTP system you might measure transactions per second. For an ETL, you might measure rows loaded per second, and so on.
If you do have a problem and system performance needs to be improved I would then check CPU during times when you experience that problem. If CPU is too high then you probably need to tune your queries, increase server resources, or reduce the total number of active queries. If CPU is too low then you may again need to tune your queries, increase the total number of active queries, or there might be some wait type that's responsible.
If you do elect to look at wait stats, you should look at them only during the period in which you're experiencing a performance problem. Looking at global wait stats over the past 55 days simply is not actionable in almost all cases. It adds unnecessary noise to the data that makes your job harder.
Once you've completed a proper investigation it is possible that changing MAXDOP
will help you. For a server of your size I would stick to MAXDOP
1, 2, 4, or 8. We cannot tell you which of those will be best for your workload. You need to monitor your throughput before and after changing MAXDOP
to make a conclusion.
add a comment |
Wait stats are just numbers. If your server is doing anything at all then you'll likely to have some kind of waits appear. Also, by definition there must be one wait which will have the highest percent. That doesn't mean anything without some kind of normalization. Your server has been up for 55 days if I'm reading the output of task manager correctly. That means that you only have 452000/(55*86400) = 0.095 wait seconds of CXPACKET
per second overall. In addition, since you're on SQL Server 2014 your CXPACKET
waits include both benign parallel waits and actionable waits. See Making parallelism waits actionable for more details. I would not jump to a conclusion that MAXDOP
is set incorrectly based on what you have presented here.
I would first measure throughput. Is there actually a problem here? We can't tell you how to do that because it depends on your workload. For an OLTP system you might measure transactions per second. For an ETL, you might measure rows loaded per second, and so on.
If you do have a problem and system performance needs to be improved I would then check CPU during times when you experience that problem. If CPU is too high then you probably need to tune your queries, increase server resources, or reduce the total number of active queries. If CPU is too low then you may again need to tune your queries, increase the total number of active queries, or there might be some wait type that's responsible.
If you do elect to look at wait stats, you should look at them only during the period in which you're experiencing a performance problem. Looking at global wait stats over the past 55 days simply is not actionable in almost all cases. It adds unnecessary noise to the data that makes your job harder.
Once you've completed a proper investigation it is possible that changing MAXDOP
will help you. For a server of your size I would stick to MAXDOP
1, 2, 4, or 8. We cannot tell you which of those will be best for your workload. You need to monitor your throughput before and after changing MAXDOP
to make a conclusion.
add a comment |
Wait stats are just numbers. If your server is doing anything at all then you'll likely to have some kind of waits appear. Also, by definition there must be one wait which will have the highest percent. That doesn't mean anything without some kind of normalization. Your server has been up for 55 days if I'm reading the output of task manager correctly. That means that you only have 452000/(55*86400) = 0.095 wait seconds of CXPACKET
per second overall. In addition, since you're on SQL Server 2014 your CXPACKET
waits include both benign parallel waits and actionable waits. See Making parallelism waits actionable for more details. I would not jump to a conclusion that MAXDOP
is set incorrectly based on what you have presented here.
I would first measure throughput. Is there actually a problem here? We can't tell you how to do that because it depends on your workload. For an OLTP system you might measure transactions per second. For an ETL, you might measure rows loaded per second, and so on.
If you do have a problem and system performance needs to be improved I would then check CPU during times when you experience that problem. If CPU is too high then you probably need to tune your queries, increase server resources, or reduce the total number of active queries. If CPU is too low then you may again need to tune your queries, increase the total number of active queries, or there might be some wait type that's responsible.
If you do elect to look at wait stats, you should look at them only during the period in which you're experiencing a performance problem. Looking at global wait stats over the past 55 days simply is not actionable in almost all cases. It adds unnecessary noise to the data that makes your job harder.
Once you've completed a proper investigation it is possible that changing MAXDOP
will help you. For a server of your size I would stick to MAXDOP
1, 2, 4, or 8. We cannot tell you which of those will be best for your workload. You need to monitor your throughput before and after changing MAXDOP
to make a conclusion.
Wait stats are just numbers. If your server is doing anything at all then you'll likely to have some kind of waits appear. Also, by definition there must be one wait which will have the highest percent. That doesn't mean anything without some kind of normalization. Your server has been up for 55 days if I'm reading the output of task manager correctly. That means that you only have 452000/(55*86400) = 0.095 wait seconds of CXPACKET
per second overall. In addition, since you're on SQL Server 2014 your CXPACKET
waits include both benign parallel waits and actionable waits. See Making parallelism waits actionable for more details. I would not jump to a conclusion that MAXDOP
is set incorrectly based on what you have presented here.
I would first measure throughput. Is there actually a problem here? We can't tell you how to do that because it depends on your workload. For an OLTP system you might measure transactions per second. For an ETL, you might measure rows loaded per second, and so on.
If you do have a problem and system performance needs to be improved I would then check CPU during times when you experience that problem. If CPU is too high then you probably need to tune your queries, increase server resources, or reduce the total number of active queries. If CPU is too low then you may again need to tune your queries, increase the total number of active queries, or there might be some wait type that's responsible.
If you do elect to look at wait stats, you should look at them only during the period in which you're experiencing a performance problem. Looking at global wait stats over the past 55 days simply is not actionable in almost all cases. It adds unnecessary noise to the data that makes your job harder.
Once you've completed a proper investigation it is possible that changing MAXDOP
will help you. For a server of your size I would stick to MAXDOP
1, 2, 4, or 8. We cannot tell you which of those will be best for your workload. You need to monitor your throughput before and after changing MAXDOP
to make a conclusion.
edited Mar 24 at 15:09
Learning_DBAdmin
1,055219
1,055219
answered Mar 24 at 14:26
Joe ObbishJoe Obbish
23k43498
23k43498
add a comment |
add a comment |
Your 'starting' maxdop should be 4; smallest number of cores per numa node up to 8. Your formula is incorrect.
High percentage of waits for a particular type means nothing. Everything in SQL waits, so something is always the highest. The ONLY thing high cxpacket waits means is that you have a high percentage of parallelism going on. CPU doesn't look high overall (at least for the snapshot provided), so probably not a problem.
Before ever trying to solve a problem, define the problem. What problem are you trying to solve? In this case, it seems you've defined the problem as high percentage of cxpacket waits, but that in and of itself is not a problem.
Virtual NUMA could easily have 2 cores per numa node. Why do you claim 4 is the smallest number of cores per numa node? Can you explain what you mean?
– Max Vernon
Mar 25 at 15:00
add a comment |
Your 'starting' maxdop should be 4; smallest number of cores per numa node up to 8. Your formula is incorrect.
High percentage of waits for a particular type means nothing. Everything in SQL waits, so something is always the highest. The ONLY thing high cxpacket waits means is that you have a high percentage of parallelism going on. CPU doesn't look high overall (at least for the snapshot provided), so probably not a problem.
Before ever trying to solve a problem, define the problem. What problem are you trying to solve? In this case, it seems you've defined the problem as high percentage of cxpacket waits, but that in and of itself is not a problem.
Virtual NUMA could easily have 2 cores per numa node. Why do you claim 4 is the smallest number of cores per numa node? Can you explain what you mean?
– Max Vernon
Mar 25 at 15:00
add a comment |
Your 'starting' maxdop should be 4; smallest number of cores per numa node up to 8. Your formula is incorrect.
High percentage of waits for a particular type means nothing. Everything in SQL waits, so something is always the highest. The ONLY thing high cxpacket waits means is that you have a high percentage of parallelism going on. CPU doesn't look high overall (at least for the snapshot provided), so probably not a problem.
Before ever trying to solve a problem, define the problem. What problem are you trying to solve? In this case, it seems you've defined the problem as high percentage of cxpacket waits, but that in and of itself is not a problem.
Your 'starting' maxdop should be 4; smallest number of cores per numa node up to 8. Your formula is incorrect.
High percentage of waits for a particular type means nothing. Everything in SQL waits, so something is always the highest. The ONLY thing high cxpacket waits means is that you have a high percentage of parallelism going on. CPU doesn't look high overall (at least for the snapshot provided), so probably not a problem.
Before ever trying to solve a problem, define the problem. What problem are you trying to solve? In this case, it seems you've defined the problem as high percentage of cxpacket waits, but that in and of itself is not a problem.
answered Mar 25 at 11:24
Jared KarneyJared Karney
952
952
Virtual NUMA could easily have 2 cores per numa node. Why do you claim 4 is the smallest number of cores per numa node? Can you explain what you mean?
– Max Vernon
Mar 25 at 15:00
add a comment |
Virtual NUMA could easily have 2 cores per numa node. Why do you claim 4 is the smallest number of cores per numa node? Can you explain what you mean?
– Max Vernon
Mar 25 at 15:00
Virtual NUMA could easily have 2 cores per numa node. Why do you claim 4 is the smallest number of cores per numa node? Can you explain what you mean?
– Max Vernon
Mar 25 at 15:00
Virtual NUMA could easily have 2 cores per numa node. Why do you claim 4 is the smallest number of cores per numa node? Can you explain what you mean?
– Max Vernon
Mar 25 at 15:00
add a comment |
I think the most pertinent question is...are you actually experiencing any performance issues? If the answer is no, then why are you looking for a problem when there isn't one?
Like the other answers have said, everything waits, and all CX waits indicate is if you have queries going parallel, something I will mention is maybe you should look at what your cost threshold for parallelism is set at IF you are having issues with the queries that are going parallel ie small queries that aren't performing a lot of work going parallel and that is possibly making them run worse, not better, and large queries that should be going parallel are being delayed because of all the smaller ones that are running poorly.
If not then, you don't have a problem stop trying to create one.
Please read the question completely, cost threshold for parallelism is provided.
– Learning_DBAdmin
Mar 31 at 3:41
add a comment |
I think the most pertinent question is...are you actually experiencing any performance issues? If the answer is no, then why are you looking for a problem when there isn't one?
Like the other answers have said, everything waits, and all CX waits indicate is if you have queries going parallel, something I will mention is maybe you should look at what your cost threshold for parallelism is set at IF you are having issues with the queries that are going parallel ie small queries that aren't performing a lot of work going parallel and that is possibly making them run worse, not better, and large queries that should be going parallel are being delayed because of all the smaller ones that are running poorly.
If not then, you don't have a problem stop trying to create one.
Please read the question completely, cost threshold for parallelism is provided.
– Learning_DBAdmin
Mar 31 at 3:41
add a comment |
I think the most pertinent question is...are you actually experiencing any performance issues? If the answer is no, then why are you looking for a problem when there isn't one?
Like the other answers have said, everything waits, and all CX waits indicate is if you have queries going parallel, something I will mention is maybe you should look at what your cost threshold for parallelism is set at IF you are having issues with the queries that are going parallel ie small queries that aren't performing a lot of work going parallel and that is possibly making them run worse, not better, and large queries that should be going parallel are being delayed because of all the smaller ones that are running poorly.
If not then, you don't have a problem stop trying to create one.
I think the most pertinent question is...are you actually experiencing any performance issues? If the answer is no, then why are you looking for a problem when there isn't one?
Like the other answers have said, everything waits, and all CX waits indicate is if you have queries going parallel, something I will mention is maybe you should look at what your cost threshold for parallelism is set at IF you are having issues with the queries that are going parallel ie small queries that aren't performing a lot of work going parallel and that is possibly making them run worse, not better, and large queries that should be going parallel are being delayed because of all the smaller ones that are running poorly.
If not then, you don't have a problem stop trying to create one.
answered Mar 30 at 20:42
TheDwindlingDbaTheDwindlingDba
71
71
Please read the question completely, cost threshold for parallelism is provided.
– Learning_DBAdmin
Mar 31 at 3:41
add a comment |
Please read the question completely, cost threshold for parallelism is provided.
– Learning_DBAdmin
Mar 31 at 3:41
Please read the question completely, cost threshold for parallelism is provided.
– Learning_DBAdmin
Mar 31 at 3:41
Please read the question completely, cost threshold for parallelism is provided.
– Learning_DBAdmin
Mar 31 at 3:41
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Database Administrators Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdba.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f232943%2fmaxdop-settings-for-sql-server-2014%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
I agree with @JaredKarney 's comment in his answer: What are you trying to fix/solve? Are you encountering bad performance? Why do you believe that a high CXPACKET wait is bad? Could you please elaborate on why your situation is different than all the other questions and answers regarding this issue?
– hot2use
Mar 25 at 15:42
@hot2use Yes, I am having performance issue and trying to see all possible aspects which could deteriorate performance. I am not expert on CXPACKET wait stats and hence wanted to have some guidance from experts.
– Learning_DBAdmin
Mar 25 at 17:23