Andy Stubbs wrote: > > Hi, long time listener, first time caller (I think), > > I've got a database which I'm looking to increase performance, either by > buying bigger kit or by somehow optimising current configuration. > > I'm running MySQL-Max-3.23.56-1 from the mysql.com RPMs on a Dell > Poweredge 2500 with dual 1400MHz PIII processors and 4GB RAM with RedHat > 7.3 kernel 2.4.18-10smp. > > The database itself is actually quite small; about 3.3GB on disk. Disk > configuration is RAID-5, 3 disks, chunksize 8KB, default mounting options. > > Currently, when moderately busy, it's not unusual to see 400 queries/sec, > so I imagine when running top whack at the moment we're probably hitting > up to 500 selects/second. Keeping our developers focussed on how their > design decisions affect performance is a continual process of course... > > Anyway, the load average on this server is hitting 2 occasionally, and > it's time either to tune the configuration, move it onto some other kit, > or buy in some kit specifically. Apparently I might be looking at the > traffic on the database quadrupling in the next few months, so I'm keen on > getting this sorted ASAP. > > Having Read The Fine Manual, and being more of a coder/sysadmin than a DBA > I have some dumb questions. Which are: > > 1. Does anybody else have any experience with this situation? Good, Bad, > Ugly? > > 2. I can move this DB to a dual PE2600 with dual Xeon 1.8GHz processors. > and I can get up to 6GB RAM in there. Is it worth doing this? i.e., how > much extra capacity does this buy me? Does enabling HyperThreading on > the Xeons help or hinder database servers? > > 3. Would upgrading to 4.0.13 help at all? What kind of performance does it > have compared with 3.23.56? This is a medium term goal anyway, and > we'd like to take rather more time over it. > > 4. I read that on a 32 bit architecture (like these Pentium class CPUs) > the database tables are not memory-mapped (i.e., it's not possible to > store the entire database in memory anyway). Is this the case with the > 64 bit Solaris too? Is there a planned implementation schedule for this > functionality? > > 5. What's the performance of MySQL like on Solaris 8/9 compared to Linux > 2.4.18? Is a big multiprocessor Sun box (like a Sun Fire 880 or 1280) a > good choice for a database server running MySQL? Or are there more > suitable platforms? Is, in fact, something like a SunFire 880 overkill? > > 6. Would it be complete lunacy, in the absence of memory-mapped tables, to > specify a RAM-disk on which to store the database? Should improve seek > times, eh? And lots of redundant UPS stuff. > > 7. Any other suggestions welcome. I'm a bit nervous about turning off > atime on mounting the disks - is it really not used by the database > anywhere? what kind of performance boost does it give? > > Regards, > > Andy > > -- > Andy Stubbs, B.A., Ph.D. > Network Manager, Active Hotels Ltd. > +44 1223 578106 > Andy, A load avg of 2 sounds like the machine is under a high I/O load. Have you considered using 15k rpm drives? Is your raid setup hardware or software?
walt -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
