Woody Vs Sarge
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 07:24:15 -0400
"Timothy Spear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> the pre-packaged MySQL. Again, no explanation as to why FYI, this
> database about 2GB with over a billion records split between the two
primary
> transaction tables.
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 07:24:15 -0400
"Timothy Spear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> the pre-packaged MySQL. Again, no explanation as to why FYI, this
> database about 2GB with over a billion records split between the two primary
> transaction tables.
A 2GB DB with a billion+ records in it??
Ron Johnson wrote:
The readahead on the Woody box is 8, it is 256 on the sarge box.
That's one difference.
Are both boxes only MySQL servers, and are you *sure* that the
Sarge box is quiescent when you run the test?
The sarge box is a production box, which runs the standard LAMP setup.
So it
Marty:
> Jochen Schulz wrote:
> >
> >Again, I think you are searching in the wrong direction. Your 'hdparm
> >-tT' results clearly showed that the great difference between your
> >servers doesn't lie in hard disk performance (48 to 43 MB/s), but in
> >Memory/CPU performance (278 to 58 MB/s).
>
> T
Marty wrote:
Again, I think you are searching in the wrong direction. Your 'hdparm
-tT' results clearly showed that the great difference between your
servers doesn't lie in hard disk performance (48 to 43 MB/s), but in
Memory/CPU performance (278 to 58 MB/s).
That would be a very gross miscon
Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
There is no such thing as "raid caching". There is something
called "write caching", but that doesn't have anything to
do with reads.
I'm not trying to start a debate, but I don't follow this logic
at all.
What if the system tries to read back some write cached d
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jochen Schulz wrote:
>> Simon:
>>> Jacob S wrote:
>>>
>>> # hdparm /dev/hde
>>> [...]
>>> # hdparm /dev/hdg
>>
>> Again, I think you are searching in the wrong direction. Your 'hdparm
>> -tT' results clearly showed that the great
On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 06:03:28PM +1200, Simon wrote:
> Jacob S wrote:
>
> The above raid consists of:
>
> # hdparm /dev/hde
>
> /dev/hde:
> multcount= 0 (off)
> I/O support = 0 (default 16-bit)
> unmaskirq= 0 (off)
> using_dma= 1 (on)
> keepsettings = 0 (off)
> nowerr
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 2:03 AM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: MySQL Performance Woody Vs Sarge
Jacob S wrote:
>>>What does 'hdparm' return for the RAID drive on each server when you
>>>don't give it any options (ie. &
On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 18:03:28 +1200
Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jacob S wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> Jacob - Nearly Right:
>
> woody(dev) = faster (Linux version 2.4.18-bf2.4):
>
> # hdparm /dev/md0
> /dev/md0:
> BLKROGET failed: Invalid argument
> geometry = 23632/2/4, sectors = 80405120
Jochen Schulz wrote:
Simon:
Jacob S wrote:
# hdparm /dev/hde
[...]
# hdparm /dev/hdg
Again, I think you are searching in the wrong direction. Your 'hdparm
-tT' results clearly showed that the great difference between your
servers doesn't lie in hard disk performance (48 to 43 MB/s), but in
Me
Simon:
> Jacob S wrote:
>
> # hdparm /dev/hde
> [...]
> # hdparm /dev/hdg
Again, I think you are searching in the wrong direction. Your 'hdparm
-tT' results clearly showed that the great difference between your
servers doesn't lie in hard disk performance (48 to 43 MB/s), but in
Memory/CPU perfor
Jacob S wrote:
What does 'hdparm' return for the RAID drive on each server when you
don't give it any options (ie. 'hdparm /dev/hda')? You might also
include the same output for hdparm run each of the hard drives used
to make the array.
What are the specs on the hard drives/RAID setup on both
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Step 1. Switch to Postgres.
Life's far too short to waste time reading replies like that.
Why. I was serious. He has a database that is approaching 1 million
records. MySQL simply does not perform as well with large databases.
Thus, the most logical thing to d
On Tue, 31 May 2005 13:58:41 +1200
Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jacob S wrote:
>
> > What does 'hdparm' return for the RAID drive on each server when you
> > don't give it any options (ie. 'hdparm /dev/hda')? You might also
> > include the same output for hdparm run each of the hard drives
On Tue, 31 May 2005 02:59:47 -0400
Hal Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 31 May 2005 02:49 am, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> > On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 09:53:53PM -0600, s. keeling wrote:
> > > Incoming from Roberto C. Sanchez:
> > > > On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 12:39:25PM +1200, Simon wro
Simon:
>
> The only difference i can find is that an htparm on the RAID drive:
>
> woody:
>
> Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.46 seconds =278.26 MB/sec
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.33 seconds = 48.12 MB/sec
>
> sarge:
>
> Timing cached reads: 196 MB in 3.38 seconds =
On Tuesday 31 May 2005 02:49 am, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 09:53:53PM -0600, s. keeling wrote:
> > Incoming from Roberto C. Sanchez:
> > > On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 12:39:25PM +1200, Simon wrote:
> > > > How do i start figuing out this issue?
> > >
> > > Step 1. Switch to P
On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 09:53:53PM -0600, s. keeling wrote:
> Incoming from Roberto C. Sanchez:
> > On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 12:39:25PM +1200, Simon wrote:
> > >
> > > How do i start figuing out this issue?
> >
> > Step 1. Switch to Postgres.
>
> Life's far too short to waste time reading replie
Incoming from Roberto C. Sanchez:
> On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 12:39:25PM +1200, Simon wrote:
> >
> > How do i start figuing out this issue?
>
> Step 1. Switch to Postgres.
Life's far too short to waste time reading replies like that.
--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficient
On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:39:25 +1200
Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi There, I have a strange issue with mysql performance... We are
> running sarge on our production web server and woody on our dev
> server... MySQL is the only issue we have:
>
> Both servers are running MySQL 4.0.24, one D
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 12:39:25PM +1200, Simon wrote:
> Hi There, I have a strange issue with mysql performance... We are running
> sarge
> on our production web server and woody on our dev server... MySQL is the only
> issue we have:
>
> Both servers are running MySQL 4.0.24, one Debian_4 (wo
Hi There, I have a strange issue with mysql performance... We are
running sarge on our production web server and woody on our dev
server... MySQL is the only issue we have:
Both servers are running MySQL 4.0.24, one Debian_4 (woody) and one
Debian_5 (sarge)... Both my.cnf files are pretty much
23 matches
Mail list logo
