mysql scaling questions

[Gergely CZUCZY]

On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 08:33:08PM +0100, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> Gergely CZUCZY wrote:
> >On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 10:52:39PM +0100, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >>Gergely CZUCZY wrote:
> >>
> >>>>* Compare to my config file here:
> >>>>
> >>>>http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/scaling/my.cnf
> >>>>
> >>>>The default mysql config has very poor performance for innodb (you need at least innodb_thread_concurrency = 0 to disable some 
> >>>>mysql brain-death).  Maybe tuning is required for myisam also.
> >>>>
> >>>>* Also make sure you are using identical config settings on the two systems.
> >>>http://phoemix.harmless.hu/mysql/ verify yourself. Only the paths are
> >>>updated, but the main parameters are just the same.
> >>You are not in fact using the same config parameters as I am.  When I use your config file I see a large performance loss when I run 
> >>locally even with innodb.
> >So, the updated config is here:
> >http://phoemix.harmless.hu/mysql/my.cnf.kris
> >I've migrated the values from your config.
> >And the plot is here:
> >http://phoemix.harmless.hu/mysql/rw-kris.png
> >I"ve also plotted a current production system, which crashes around 96 threads in
> >the test, or so. That's a Linux-2.6.12 and MySQL 5.0.22, so it should be quite unoptimized
> >compared to any recent version of anything.
> >As it seems, you were right. These adjustments made a very slight performance boost, around
> >5%. But it's still lagging behind.
> >Again, this is MyISAM, not innodb. The "tc4" and "tc16" strings mean the thread_concurrency
> >is either set to 4 or 16. Your config had 16, but I've googled for it, and some resources
> >suggested setting that to CPUs*2, and that's 4 in my case.
> >I've updated the MySQL version on FreeBSD to 5.0.51, and will try to get this version
> >on linux also, and do a comparision with that one, too.
> >Sincerely,
> >Gergely Czuczy
> >mailto: gergely.czuczy at harmless.hu
> 
> OK.  The caching problem with myisam is unrelated to the other config changes then.

I have to finish my test, sorry for not being able to give more results.
The boss decided to put back this box to the serverfarm, and since we're
not using FreeBSD, just I'm a bsd-guy, I won't be able to do anything farther
on on this topic.

I hope I did something useful with this tests of my at all.

And thank you all for helping with all the ideas, especially to
you, Kris.

Sincerely,

Gergely Czuczy
mailto: gergely.czuczy at harmless.hu

-- 
Weenies test. Geniuses solve problems that arise.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 2173 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-performance/attachments/20080104/c0732361/attachment.pgp