Unix Technical Forum

SEO

vBulletin Search Engine Optimization


Go Back   Unix Technical Forum > Database Server Software > Microsoft SQL Server > SQL Server

Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 03-06-2008, 02:04 PM
B D Jensen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Queue handling design pattern?

Hi!
I'm looking for other good ideas how to implement an queue where
multiple
jobs.

For now I have a single table with identity column and some
information about what to do. Combined with multiple jobs "eating"
from queue, e.g. they
take specific rows for that job corresponding to id % #queue
(modulus).

But each jobs take different time, so I see often that only half of
queues running
while long running jobs blocks for run of waiting jobs.

Best regards
Bjorn
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 03-06-2008, 02:04 PM
David Portas
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Queue handling design pattern?

On 4 Mar, 19:25, B D Jensen <bjorn.d.jen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
> I'm looking for other good ideas how to implement an queue where
> multiple
> jobs.
>
> For now I have a single table with identity column and some
> information about what to do. Combined with multiple jobs "eating"
> from queue, e.g. they
> take specific rows for that job corresponding to id % #queue
> (modulus).
>
> But each jobs take different time, so I see often that only half of
> queues running
> while long running jobs blocks for run of waiting jobs.
>
> Best regards
> Bjorn


Have you considered using Service Broker?
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms166043.aspx

--
David Portas
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 03-06-2008, 02:04 PM
Erland Sommarskog
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Queue handling design pattern?

B D Jensen (bjorn.d.jensen@gmail.com) writes:
> I'm looking for other good ideas how to implement an queue where
> multiple jobs.
>
> For now I have a single table with identity column and some information
> about what to do. Combined with multiple jobs "eating" from queue, e.g.
> they take specific rows for that job corresponding to id % #queue
> (modulus).
>
> But each jobs take different time, so I see often that only half of
> queues running while long running jobs blocks for run of waiting jobs.


THe unavoidable question is: what's wrong with Service Broker?


--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...ads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinf...ons/books.mspx
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 03-06-2008, 02:04 PM
--CELKO--
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Queue handling design pattern?

> For now I have a single table with an IDENTITY column [sic: table property] and some information about what to do. Combined with multiple jobs "eating" from queue <<

If you really want to mimic a queue in SQL for some strange reason,
then get out an old book on batch systems from the 1970's. You can
mimic them with a little effort:

CREATE TABLE Queue
(job_nbr INTEGER NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,
job_submission_time DATETIME DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP NOT NULL,
job_priority INTEGER DEFAULT 100 NOT NULL,
etc.);

You pick the job to run with something like this:

SELECT job_nbr, ...
FROM Queue AS Q1
WHERE Q1.job_nbr
= (SELECT MIN(job_nbr)
FROM Queue AS Q2
WHERE Q2.job_priority
=(SELECT MIN(Q3.job_priority)
FROM Queue AS Q3));

Every now and then, run a procedure that decrements the job_priority
of rows that have been in the queue for over (n) seconds until it is
zero and will be done next. If you want to force a job to the top of
the queue, insert it with a low (non-zero) job_priority value.
Remember to delete the jobs as they are processed. It is easy to see
that all jobs will clear the queue.

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 03-06-2008, 02:04 PM
B D Jensen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Queue handling design pattern?

Hi!
Thank to all ;-)
There's probably nothing wrong with Service Broker, actually I
expected there must be something usefull built-in :-)

What is better than "mimic a queue in SQL"?
Best regards
Bjorn
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 03-06-2008, 02:04 PM
--CELKO--
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Queue handling design pattern?

>> What is better than "mimic a queue in SQL"? <<

Service Broker or a batch operating system of some kind. Hey, they
work great on Mainframes!
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 03-06-2008, 02:04 PM
B D Jensen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Queue handling design pattern?

Hi again!
I'm still trying to find out how to use Service Broker (SB) -
I will see what I can find, but maybe you have time
to explain me:
can I make some custom ordering of queue usage, e.g. handling that
request from bosses are more important than standard
requests (for now i use simple ordering on table column storing info
about source of request)?

where to find a simple example for paralell batch processesing using
SB?

Thanks
Bjorn
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2008, 02:29 PM
--CELKO--
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Queue handling design pattern?

>> I'm still trying to find out how to use Service Broker (SB) - I will see what I can find, but maybe you have time to explain me: <<

I would have to learn it first There are more experienced people
on this newsgroup that can help you.

>> can I make some custom ordering of queue usage, e.g. handling requests from bosses is more important than standard requests (for now I use simple ordering on table column storing info about source of request)? <<


That is the idea of the priority number I showed you in my posting. A
worker can come into the queue with (priority = 100), middle
management can come into the queue with (priority = 50) and the
company president can start at (priority = 0). But the decrement
procedure will assure that every job eventually gets to (priority =
0), so nobody is live-locked.

I did an article decades ago for INFORMATION SYSTEMS NEWS when I had a
column on software Engineering about the different queue handling
methods; I compared them to traffic signals. I don't know if I have
an electronic copy of it, but it was funny and might help
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2008, 02:29 PM
B D Jensen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Queue handling design pattern?

Hi Joe!
I now looked a little more at SB, it seems a bit complex for this type
for this purpose (=> much more code than I had written in my
solution)...
.... but I probably should read more so I fully understand what it can
give...

I looked also at your select statement picking job to do, but my
problem is not to find out wich
job to process. I have 8 scheduled jobs. Each job/queue has its "own"
rows to process, but since some reports are faster than others, some
jobs will be delayed, while not all queues have something to do after
a while.

The reason why each row is related to a specifik job/queue is to
ensure, that only one single jobs tries to handle the request (row).
And I also like to see which job is processing which row, so I can
stop the right job,
if I need to stop processing manually because it tooks too long.

Thank you for your ideas ;-)
Best Regards
Bjorn
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2008, 02:29 PM
B D Jensen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Queue handling design pattern?

Hi Erland!
There is nothing wrong wil SB, and as I found out in SS2008 it also
support
"ordering" after priority.

It seems a bit complex, but thats probably because it's new to me ;-)
Thank you for your help
Best Regards
Bjorn
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0
UnixAdminTalk.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724