mysql scaling questions
phoemix at harmless.hu
Sun Dec 30 06:11:23 PST 2007
On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 03:08:28PM +0100, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> Gergely CZUCZY wrote:
> >On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 02:35:56PM +0100, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >>Gergely CZUCZY wrote:
> >>>>I appreciate that you might be constrained by local requirements, but it's really not meaningful to compare different mysql
> >>>>versions if your goal is to study OS performance.
> >>>It'd be a PITA to install the both versions. Maybe now, that the ports freeze is over, i can
> >>>do something. But honestly, every mysql version was faster on linux, than eny on FreeBSD,
> >>>even the .22 one was faster. We start work on Jan02, I will see what can I do.
> >>Regardless, we need a stable baseline to compare to.
> >Cannot do it sooner then january. Any recommended versions?
> Either 5.0.45 on both, or 5.0.51 on both, please.
> >>Still waiting for your sysbench command lines :)
> >There were 2 scripts and a sources file with options:
> >basicall that's everything. I know it's a but complex, but this was all behind it.
> OK, that was very important since you're changing defaults.
For different configurations, yes. But every test is heterogenous.
> It looks like myisam is doing huge numbers of concurrent reads of the same file which is running into exclusive locking in the kernel
> (vnode interlock and lockbuilder mtxpool). Does it not do any caching of the data in userspace but relies on querying into the kernel
> every time? innodb doesn't have this behaviour.
Sorry, but was this a rethorical kind of question, or was this addressed to me? :)
If the later, then how do I find this out?
mailto: gergely.czuczy at harmless.hu
Weenies test. Geniuses solve problems that arise.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 1755 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-performance/attachments/20071230/6add7ec3/attachment.pgp
More information about the freebsd-performance