or it could be that your buffer size is too small, as mysql is spending lot of CPU time for compress and uncompressing
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Ananda Kumar <anan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is you system READ intensive or WRITE intensive. > If you have enable compression for WRITE intensive data, then CPU cost > will be more. > > > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Johan De Meersman <vegiv...@tuxera.be>wrote: > >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Reindl Harald" <h.rei...@thelounge.net> >> > >> > interesting because i have here a dbmail-server with no CPU load and >> > innodb with compression enabled since 2009 (innodb plugin in the past) >> >> Ah, this is a mixed-use server that also receives data from several Cacti >> installs. >> >> > [--] Data in InnoDB tables: 6G (Tables: 49) >> [--] Data in InnoDB tables: 17G (Tables: 276) >> >> > [--] Up for: 5d 0h 44m 10s (455M q [1K qps], 50K conn, TX: 36B, RX: 13B) >> [--] Up for: 11d 23h 27m 20s (200M q [193.511 qps], 8M conn, TX: 132B, >> RX: 35B) >> >> > [--] Reads / Writes: 90% / 10% >> [--] Reads / Writes: 18% / 82% >> >> I guess it's reasonable that I get a lot more CPU overhead from >> compression, as you get a lot of reads from decompressed blocks in the >> cache :-) >> >> >> >> -- >> Bier met grenadyn >> Is als mosterd by den wyn >> Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel >> Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel >> >> -- >> MySQL General Mailing List >> For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql >> To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql >> >> >
