# innodb\_thread\_concurrency values for many cpu systems

**URL:** <https://forums.percona.com/t/innodb-thread-concurrency-values-for-many-cpu-systems/93>\
**Category:** Other MySQL® Questions\
**Created:** [October 2, 2006, 10:25am UTC](https://forums.percona.com/t/innodb-thread-concurrency-values-for-many-cpu-systems/93 "2006-10-02T10:25:38Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![aronrosenberg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@aronrosenberg](https://forums.percona.com/u/aronrosenberg)\
**Post date:** [October 2, 2006, 10:25am UTC](https://forums.percona.com/t/innodb-thread-concurrency-values-for-many-cpu-systems/93/1 "2006-10-02T10:25:38Z")

</div>

High level question: What is a good innodb\_thread\_concurrency value for a large scale 8 CPU box?

We have a new set of dual processor dual core (with hyperthread) servers on the way and are debating which value for innodb\_thread\_concurrency is best. The OS see’s 8 CPU’s in each of these boxes. Shoould we use a high or infinate innodb\_thread\_concurrency or use lower because of the problem of sharing the mutex’s for the innodb buffer pool that was blogged about last month?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Peter](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forums.percona.com/peter/32/2_2.png) [@Peter](https://forums.percona.com/u/Peter)\
**Post date:** [October 3, 2006, 12:11pm UTC](https://forums.percona.com/t/innodb-thread-concurrency-values-for-many-cpu-systems/93/2 "2006-10-03T12:11:56Z")

</div>

innodb\_thread\_concurrency is not always solving problems on boxes with high number of CPUs. You may try values 8 or 16 to start with while sometimes smaller value as 2 or 4 give better performance.

You also might wish to disable hypperthreading.

You can also check this post:

[http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2006/07/28/returning-to-](http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2006/07/28/returning-to-) innodb-scalability/

It has plenty of good details.