• Linux schedulers in tpcc like benchmark


    I mentioned earlier that IO scheduler CFQ coming by default in RedHat / CentOS 5.x may be not so good for MySQL. And yesterday one customer reported that just changing cfq to noop solved their InnoDB IO problems. I ran tpcc scripts against XtraDB on our Dell PowerEdge R900 server (16 cores, 8 disks in RAID10, controller Perc/6i with BBU) to compare cfq, deadline, noop and anticipatory (last one just to get number, I did not expect a lot from anticipatory).

    Here is result (in transactions per minute, more is better):

    cfq2793.5
    noop6586.4
    deadline6513.7
    anticipatory1465

    Here is graph of disk writes (column bo in vmstat) during benchmark

    As you see noop / deadline can utilize disks much better.

    For reference I used tpcc scripts from https://launchpad.net/perconatools, generated 100W (about 9.5GB of data on disk), and used next XtraDB params:

    Shell











    [mysqld]
    #mysqld options in alphabetical order
    user=root 
    default_table_type=MYISAM 

    innodb_buffer_pool_size=3G
    innodb_data_file_path=ibdata1:10M:autoextend
    innodb_file_per_table=1
    innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit=1
    innodb_log_buffer_size=8M
    innodb_log_files_in_group=2
    innodb_log_file_size=128M
    innodb_thread_concurrency=0
    innodb_flush_method             = O_DIREC 

    innodb_write_io_threads=4
    innodb_read_io_threads=4
    innodb_io_capacity=800

    innodb_adaptive_checkpoint=1 
    max_connections=3000
    query_cache_size=0
    skip-name-resolve 

    table_cache=2048

    版权声明:QQ:597507041

  • 相关阅读:
    spring事务调用失效问题
    redis的主从、哨兵配置
    Lucene介绍与入门使用
    超详细“零”基础kafka入门篇
    消息队列——RabbitMQ学习笔记
    linux中RabbitMQ安装教程
    JAVA正则
    JAVA String类
    JAVA lang包介绍
    JAVA枚举
  • 原文地址:https://www.cnblogs.com/spzhangfei/p/4801757.html
Copyright © 2020-2023  润新知