Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 13 Mar 2007 20:55:46 -0400
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Alban Hertroys <dalroi@solfertje.student.utwente.nl>
Cc:        Martin <list@manuelmartini.it>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD mysql Benchmark  on 4BSD/ULE scheduler and i386/amd64
Message-ID:  <20070314005546.GA15742@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <330A1347-2309-417E-83B5-5B2CE005B9C8@solfertje.student.utwente.nl>
References:  <20070313154729.1ec6abb7@DELOREAN.manuelmartini.it> <20070313194206.GA5957@crodrigues.org> <20070313195756.GA11679@xor.obsecurity.org> <20070313211908.59de6504@DELOREAN.manuelmartini.it> <20070313214559.GB13079@xor.obsecurity.org> <330A1347-2309-417E-83B5-5B2CE005B9C8@solfertje.student.utwente.nl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 01:27:22AM +0100, Alban Hertroys wrote:
> 
> On Mar 13, 2007, at 22:45, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> 
> >>I used sql-bench
> >>/usr/ports/databases/mysql50-server/work/mysql-5.0.33/sql-bench/
> >>(at this time)
> >>the default Makefile of port have "--without-bench" options  so u  
> >>need
> >>to make manually
> >
> >Hmm.  This seems to be a single-user test, so while it's presumably
> >testing some relevant basic ingredients of database performance it's
> >probably not a realistic measure of server performance.  i.e. if you
> >really only have a maximum of one client accessing your database then
> >your 4-core system is being more than 75% wasted :)
> 
> Sorry, couldn't resist...
> 
> This being mysql, the number of processors isn't going to matter  
> much, no matter how many connections you have. Mysql doesn't scale  
> very well to multiple cpu's.

This might be standard dogma, but it also appears not to be true:

  http://people.freebsd.org/~kris/scaling/mysql.html

> It doesn't compare[1] to a tuned PostgreSQL database, which I think  
> is a considerably more interesting benchmark. And of course that  
> would include multiple simultaneous connections.

On the same test postgresql is indeed faster, I haven't finished
benchmarking it yet though.

Kris



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070314005546.GA15742>