我正在使用Parallel.ForEach并且我正在进行一些数据库更新，现在没有设置MaxDegreeOfParallelism，双核处理器机器会导致sql客户端超时，否则四核处理器机器会以某种方式不会超时。
现在我无法控制代码运行的处理器内核是什么类型，但是我可以使用MaxDegreeOfParallelism更改某些设置，这些设置可能会同时运行较少的操作而不会导致超时？
我可以增加超时但它不是一个好的解决方案，如果在较低的CPU上我可以同时处理较少的操作，这将减少对cpu的负担。
好的我也读过所有其他帖子和MSDN，但是将MaxDegreeOfParallelism设置为较低值会让我的四核机器受损吗？
例如，无论如何，如果CPU有两个内核，那么使用20，如果CPU有四个内核，那么40？
答案 0 :(得分：64)
答案是，无论核心数量如何，它都是整个并行操作的上限。
因此，即使您因为等待IO或锁定而不使用CPU，也不会并行运行额外的任务，只会指定您指定的最大值。
为了找到这个，我写了这段测试代码。那里有一个人工锁，可以刺激TPL使用更多的线程。当您的代码等待IO或数据库时，也会发生同样的情况。
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var locker = new Object();
int count = 0;
Parallel.For
(0
, 1000
, new ParallelOptions { MaxDegreeOfParallelism = 2 }
, (i) =>
{
Interlocked.Increment(ref count);
lock (locker)
{
Console.WriteLine("Number of active threads:" + count);
Thread.Sleep(10);
}
Interlocked.Decrement(ref count);
}
);
}
}
如果我没有指定MaxDegreeOfParallelism，则控制台日志记录显示最多同时运行大约8个任务。像这样：
Number of active threads:6
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:6
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
Number of active threads:7
它开始降低，随着时间的推移而增加，最后它试图同时运行8。
如果我将它限制在某个任意值（比如2），我会得到
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:1
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
Number of active threads:2
哦，这是在四核机器上。
答案 1 :(得分：15)
例如，无论如何，如果CPU有两个内核，那么使用20，如果CPU有四个内核，那么40？
您可以执行此操作以使并行性取决于CPU核心数：
var options = new ParallelOptions { MaxDegreeOfParallelism = Environment.ProcessorCount * 10 };
Parallel.ForEach(sourceCollection, options, sourceItem =>
{
// do something
});
但是，较新的CPU倾向于使用超线程来模拟额外的内核。因此，如果你有一个四核处理器，那么Environment.ProcessorCount可能会将此报告为8个核心。我发现如果你将并行性设置为模拟核心的帐户，那么它实际上会减慢其他线程，如UI线程。
因此，尽管操作完成得更快，但应用程序UI在此期间可能会遇到严重延迟。将“Environment.ProcessorCount”除以2似乎可以实现相同的处理速度，同时仍然保持CPU可用于UI线程。
答案 2 :(得分：1)
听起来你并行运行的代码就是死锁，这意味着除非你能找到并解决造成这种问题的问题，否则你根本不应该将它并行化。
答案 3 :(得分：0)
还有其他需要考虑的问题，尤其是对于那些多年后才发现的问题而言，通常取决于您的情况，通常最好是在DataTable中收集所有数据，然后在每个主要任务结束时使用SqlBulkCopy。
例如，我有一个过程可以运行成百万个文件，当每个文件事务进行数据库查询以插入记录时，我都会遇到相同的错误。取而代之的是，我将其遍历的每个共享都全部存储在内存的DataTable中，将DataTable转储到SQL Server中并在每个单独的共享之间清除它。批量插入耗时一秒钟，其优点是不会一次打开数千个连接。
编辑： 这是一个快速而肮脏的工作示例 SQLBulkCopy方法：
private static void updateDatabase(DataTable targetTable)
{
try
{
DataSet ds = new DataSet("FileFolderAttribute");
ds.Tables.Add(targetTable);
writeToLog(targetTable.TableName + " - Rows: " + targetTable.Rows.Count, logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
writeToLog(@"Opening SQL connection", logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
Console.WriteLine(@"Opening SQL connection");
SqlConnection sqlConnection = new SqlConnection(sqlConnectionString);
sqlConnection.Open();
SqlBulkCopy bulkCopy = new SqlBulkCopy(sqlConnection, SqlBulkCopyOptions.TableLock | SqlBulkCopyOptions.FireTriggers | SqlBulkCopyOptions.UseInternalTransaction, null);
bulkCopy.DestinationTableName = "FileFolderAttribute";
writeToLog(@"Copying data to SQL Server table", logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
Console.WriteLine(@"Copying data to SQL Server table");
foreach (var table in ds.Tables)
{
writeToLog(table.ToString(), logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
Console.WriteLine(table.ToString());
}
bulkCopy.WriteToServer(ds.Tables[0]);
sqlConnection.Close();
sqlConnection.Dispose();
writeToLog(@"Closing SQL connection", logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
writeToLog(@"Clearing local DataTable...", logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
Console.WriteLine(@"Closing SQL connection");
Console.WriteLine(@"Clearing local DataTable...");
targetTable.Clear();
ds.Tables.Remove(targetTable);
ds.Clear();
ds.Dispose();
}
catch (Exception error)
{
errorLogging(error, getCurrentMethod(), logDatabaseFile);
}
}
...并将其转储到数据表中：
private static void writeToDataTable(string ServerHostname, string RootDirectory, string RecordType, string Path, string PathDirectory, string PathFileName, string PathFileExtension, decimal SizeBytes, decimal SizeMB, DateTime DateCreated, DateTime DateModified, DateTime DateLastAccessed, string Owner, int PathLength, DateTime RecordWriteDateTime)
{
try
{
if (tableToggle)
{
DataRow toInsert = results_1.NewRow();
toInsert[0] = ServerHostname;
toInsert[1] = RootDirectory;
toInsert[2] = RecordType;
toInsert[3] = Path;
toInsert[4] = PathDirectory;
toInsert[5] = PathFileName;
toInsert[6] = PathFileExtension;
toInsert[7] = SizeBytes;
toInsert[8] = SizeMB;
toInsert[9] = DateCreated;
toInsert[10] = DateModified;
toInsert[11] = DateLastAccessed;
toInsert[12] = Owner;
toInsert[13] = PathLength;
toInsert[14] = RecordWriteDateTime;
results_1.Rows.Add(toInsert);
}
else
{
DataRow toInsert = results_2.NewRow();
toInsert[0] = ServerHostname;
toInsert[1] = RootDirectory;
toInsert[2] = RecordType;
toInsert[3] = Path;
toInsert[4] = PathDirectory;
toInsert[5] = PathFileName;
toInsert[6] = PathFileExtension;
toInsert[7] = SizeBytes;
toInsert[8] = SizeMB;
toInsert[9] = DateCreated;
toInsert[10] = DateModified;
toInsert[11] = DateLastAccessed;
toInsert[12] = Owner;
toInsert[13] = PathLength;
toInsert[14] = RecordWriteDateTime;
results_2.Rows.Add(toInsert);
}
}
catch (Exception error)
{
errorLogging(error, getCurrentMethod(), logFile);
}
}
...这是上下文，循环部分本身：
private static void processTargetDirectory(DirectoryInfo rootDirectory, string targetPathRoot)
{
DateTime StartTime = DateTime.Now;
int directoryCount = 0;
int fileCount = 0;
try
{
manageDataTables();
Console.WriteLine(rootDirectory.FullName);
writeToLog(@"Working in Directory: " + rootDirectory.FullName, logFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
applicationsDirectoryCount++;
// REPORT DIRECTORY INFO //
string directoryOwner = "";
try
{
directoryOwner = File.GetAccessControl(rootDirectory.FullName).GetOwner(typeof(System.Security.Principal.NTAccount)).ToString();
}
catch (Exception error)
{
//writeToLog("\t" + rootDirectory.FullName, logExceptionsFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
writeToLog("[" + error.Message + "] - " + rootDirectory.FullName, logExceptionsFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
errorLogging(error, getCurrentMethod(), logFile);
directoryOwner = "SeparatedUser";
}
writeToRawLog(serverHostname + "," + targetPathRoot + "," + "Directory" + "," + rootDirectory.Name + "," + rootDirectory.Extension + "," + 0 + "," + 0 + "," + rootDirectory.CreationTime + "," + rootDirectory.LastWriteTime + "," + rootDirectory.LastAccessTime + "," + directoryOwner + "," + rootDirectory.FullName.Length + "," + DateTime.Now + "," + rootDirectory.FullName + "," + "", logResultsFile, true, logFile);
//writeToDBLog(serverHostname, targetPathRoot, "Directory", rootDirectory.FullName, "", rootDirectory.Name, rootDirectory.Extension, 0, 0, rootDirectory.CreationTime, rootDirectory.LastWriteTime, rootDirectory.LastAccessTime, directoryOwner, rootDirectory.FullName.Length, DateTime.Now);
writeToDataTable(serverHostname, targetPathRoot, "Directory", rootDirectory.FullName, "", rootDirectory.Name, rootDirectory.Extension, 0, 0, rootDirectory.CreationTime, rootDirectory.LastWriteTime, rootDirectory.LastAccessTime, directoryOwner, rootDirectory.FullName.Length, DateTime.Now);
if (rootDirectory.GetDirectories().Length > 0)
{
Parallel.ForEach(rootDirectory.GetDirectories(), new ParallelOptions { MaxDegreeOfParallelism = directoryDegreeOfParallelism }, dir =>
{
directoryCount++;
Interlocked.Increment(ref threadCount);
processTargetDirectory(dir, targetPathRoot);
});
}
// REPORT FILE INFO //
Parallel.ForEach(rootDirectory.GetFiles(), new ParallelOptions { MaxDegreeOfParallelism = fileDegreeOfParallelism }, file =>
{
applicationsFileCount++;
fileCount++;
Interlocked.Increment(ref threadCount);
processTargetFile(file, targetPathRoot);
});
}
catch (Exception error)
{
writeToLog(error.Message, logExceptionsFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
errorLogging(error, getCurrentMethod(), logFile);
}
finally
{
Interlocked.Decrement(ref threadCount);
}
DateTime EndTime = DateTime.Now;
writeToLog(@"Run time for " + rootDirectory.FullName + @" is: " + (EndTime - StartTime).ToString() + @" | File Count: " + fileCount + @", Directory Count: " + directoryCount, logTimingFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
}
就像上面提到的那样，这很麻烦，但是效果很好。
对于与内存相关的问题，一旦遇到大约2,000,000条记录，我就不得不创建第二个DataTable，并在两个表之间进行替换，从而在两次更改之间将记录转储到SQL Server。因此我的SQL连接每100,000条记录中就有1条。
我这样处理：
private static void manageDataTables()
{
try
{
Console.WriteLine(@"[Checking datatable size] toggleValue: " + tableToggle + " | " + @"r1: " + results_1.Rows.Count + " - " + @"r2: " + results_2.Rows.Count);
if (tableToggle)
{
int rowCount = 0;
if (results_1.Rows.Count > datatableRecordCountThreshhold)
{
tableToggle ^= true;
writeToLog(@"results_1 row count > 100000 @ " + results_1.Rows.Count, logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
rowCount = results_1.Rows.Count;
logResultsFile = "FileServerReport_Results_" + DateTime.Now.ToString("yyyyMMdd-HHmmss") + ".txt";
Thread.Sleep(5000);
if (results_1.Rows.Count != rowCount)
{
writeToLog(@"results_1 row count increased, @ " + results_1.Rows.Count, logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
rowCount = results_1.Rows.Count;
Thread.Sleep(15000);
}
writeToLog(@"results_1 row count stopped increasing, updating database...", logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
updateDatabase(results_1);
results_1.Clear();
writeToLog(@"results_1 cleared, count: " + results_1.Rows.Count, logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
}
}
else
{
int rowCount = 0;
if (results_2.Rows.Count > datatableRecordCountThreshhold)
{
tableToggle ^= true;
writeToLog(@"results_2 row count > 100000 @ " + results_2.Rows.Count, logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
rowCount = results_2.Rows.Count;
logResultsFile = "FileServerReport_Results_" + DateTime.Now.ToString("yyyyMMdd-HHmmss") + ".txt";
Thread.Sleep(5000);
if (results_2.Rows.Count != rowCount)
{
writeToLog(@"results_2 row count increased, @ " + results_2.Rows.Count, logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
rowCount = results_2.Rows.Count;
Thread.Sleep(15000);
}
writeToLog(@"results_2 row count stopped increasing, updating database...", logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
updateDatabase(results_2);
results_2.Clear();
writeToLog(@"results_2 cleared, count: " + results_2.Rows.Count, logDatabaseFile, getLineNumber(), getCurrentMethod(), true);
}
}
}
catch (Exception error)
{
errorLogging(error, getCurrentMethod(), logDatabaseFile);
}
}
其中“ datatableRecordCountThreshhold = 100000”
答案 4 :(得分：-3)
它设置并行运行的线程数...