Re: idle query

2010-08-18 Thread Shawn Green (MySQL)

On 8/12/2010 2:32 PM, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
I also find that if I have both tables in MyISAM and use STRAIGHT_JOIN to 
force the better query plan (enumerate the longer table, for each longer 
table row use the shorter table's index to pick out the one right matching 
row from the shorter table) then the server has low I/O utilization but 
the CPU utilization is about as high as can be expected for a single query 
running on a 16-CPU machine.  Why should this thing be CPU-bound?  Here is 
the query:


create table fp2 (p VARCHAR(200) NOT NULL,
   rcd DATETIME NOT NULL, rcms SMALLINT NOT NULL, msgid BIGINT NOT 
NULL,
   q VARCHAR(200) NOT NULL, scd DATETIME NOT NULL, scms SMALLINT NOT 
NULL,

   lat DECIMAL(14,3),
   INDEX p(p), INDEX q(q) )
   AS SELECT fldrcv.p, fldrcv.cd as rcd, fldrcv.cms as rcms,
   fldrcv.msgid as msgid, fldrcv.q, fldsnd.cd as scd, fldsnd.cms as 
scms,
   TIMESTAMPDIFF(SECOND, fldsnd.cd, fldrcv.cd) + 
(fldrcv.cms-fldsnd.cms)/1000 as lat

   FROM fldrcv STRAIGHT_JOIN fldsnd
   ON fldrcv.q=fldsnd.p AND fldrcv.qboot=fldsnd.pboot
   AND fldrcv.msgid=fldsnd.msgid;

and here is some `iostat -x 5` output that shows a total of less than 50% 
I/O utilization and about 15/16 CPU utilization:


...



You are doing a lot of index work which requires a lot of memory 
manipulation. You are populating two on the new table while using at 
least one to build your data. I believe it's that random accesss memory 
work that's chewing up a big chunk of your CPU time.


Does it work better if you delay the index creation of your temporary 
table until after the table is populated?


CREATE TABLE fp2 ... SELECT ... ;
ALTER TABLE fp2 ADD KEY p(p),KEY q(q);

--
Shawn Green
MySQL Principal Technical Support Engineer
Oracle USA, Inc.
Office: Blountville, TN

--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org



Re: idle query

2010-08-12 Thread Mike Spreitzer
I also find that if I have both tables in MyISAM and use STRAIGHT_JOIN to 
force the better query plan (enumerate the longer table, for each longer 
table row use the shorter table's index to pick out the one right matching 
row from the shorter table) then the server has low I/O utilization but 
the CPU utilization is about as high as can be expected for a single query 
running on a 16-CPU machine.  Why should this thing be CPU-bound?  Here is 
the query:

create table fp2 (p VARCHAR(200) NOT NULL,
   rcd DATETIME NOT NULL, rcms SMALLINT NOT NULL, msgid BIGINT NOT 
NULL,
   q VARCHAR(200) NOT NULL, scd DATETIME NOT NULL, scms SMALLINT NOT 
NULL,
   lat DECIMAL(14,3),
   INDEX p(p), INDEX q(q) )
   AS SELECT fldrcv.p, fldrcv.cd as rcd, fldrcv.cms as rcms,
   fldrcv.msgid as msgid, fldrcv.q, fldsnd.cd as scd, fldsnd.cms as 
scms,
   TIMESTAMPDIFF(SECOND, fldsnd.cd, fldrcv.cd) + 
(fldrcv.cms-fldsnd.cms)/1000 as lat
   FROM fldrcv STRAIGHT_JOIN fldsnd
   ON fldrcv.q=fldsnd.p AND fldrcv.qboot=fldsnd.pboot
   AND fldrcv.msgid=fldsnd.msgid;

and here is some `iostat -x 5` output that shows a total of less than 50% 
I/O utilization and about 15/16 CPU utilization:

avg-cpu:  %user   %nice %system %iowait  %steal   %idle
   4.270.001.820.000.03   93.89

Device: rrqm/s   wrqm/s   r/s   w/s   rsec/s   wsec/s avgrq-sz 
avgqu-sz   await  svctm  %util
sda   0.00 1.20  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00
sdb   0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00
sdc   0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00
sdd   0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00
sde   0.00 0.00  0.00  1.20 0.00 4.60 3.83 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00
sdf   0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00
sdg   0.00 0.00  4.40  3.20  2252.80  1434.00   485.11 
0.16   20.74  13.26  10.08
sdh   0.00 0.00  4.40  2.80  2252.80  1433.60   512.00 
0.13   18.44  12.89   9.28
sdi   0.00 0.00  4.20  2.80  2150.40  1433.60   512.00 
0.13   19.20  12.91   9.04
sdj   0.00 0.00  4.40  2.80  2252.80  1433.60   512.00 
0.16   22.44  15.56  11.20
dm-0  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00
dm-1  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00

avg-cpu:  %user   %nice %system %iowait  %steal   %idle
   4.280.001.810.010.03   93.88

Device: rrqm/s   wrqm/s   r/s   w/s   rsec/s   wsec/s avgrq-sz 
avgqu-sz   await  svctm  %util
sda   0.00 0.00  0.00  0.40 0.0012.8032.00 
0.004.00   4.00   0.16
sdb   0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00
sdc   0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00
sdd   0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00
sde   0.00 0.00  0.00  0.60 0.00 3.80 6.33 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00
sdf   0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00
sdg   0.00 0.00  4.40  3.00  2252.80  1433.80   498.19 
0.17   23.57  16.65  12.32
sdh   0.00 0.00  4.40  2.80  2252.80  1433.60   512.00 
0.16   21.67  14.78  10.64
sdi   0.00 0.00  4.40  2.80  2252.80  1433.60   512.00 
0.15   20.89  14.44  10.40
sdj   0.00 0.00  4.20  2.80  2150.40  1433.60   512.00 
0.15   21.71  14.74  10.32
dm-0  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00
dm-1  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 
0.000.00   0.00   0.00


Thanks,
Mike Spreitzer




From:   Mike Spreitzer/Watson/i...@ibmus
To: Dan Nelson dnel...@allantgroup.com
Cc: MySql mysql@lists.mysql.com
Date:   08/11/2010 01:30 PM
Subject:Re: idle query



I finally started trying to optimize along the memory-based lines you 
suggested.  I am surprised to find that the query plan is to enumerate the 

memory-based table and then pick out the hundreds of related rows from the 

much larger MyISAM table.  What's going on here?

`show create table` says this about the relevant tables:

CREATE TABLE `fldsndm` (
  `p` varchar(200) NOT NULL,
  `cd` datetime NOT NULL,
  `cms` smallint(6) NOT NULL,
  `pip` char(15) NOT NULL,
  `pport` smallint(6) NOT NULL,
  `pboot` bigint(20) NOT NULL,
  `msgid` bigint(20) NOT NULL,
  `startgtime` bigint(20) NOT NULL,
  `datalen` int(11) NOT NULL,
  `toself` tinyint(1) DEFAULT NULL,
  `sepoch` bigint(20) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
  `c` decimal(11,3) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0.000

Re: idle query

2010-08-11 Thread Mike Spreitzer
I finally started trying to optimize along the memory-based lines you 
suggested.  I am surprised to find that the query plan is to enumerate the 
memory-based table and then pick out the hundreds of related rows from the 
much larger MyISAM table.  What's going on here?

`show create table` says this about the relevant tables:

CREATE TABLE `fldsndm` (
  `p` varchar(200) NOT NULL,
  `cd` datetime NOT NULL,
  `cms` smallint(6) NOT NULL,
  `pip` char(15) NOT NULL,
  `pport` smallint(6) NOT NULL,
  `pboot` bigint(20) NOT NULL,
  `msgid` bigint(20) NOT NULL,
  `startgtime` bigint(20) NOT NULL,
  `datalen` int(11) NOT NULL,
  `toself` tinyint(1) DEFAULT NULL,
  `sepoch` bigint(20) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
  `c` decimal(11,3) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0.000',
  UNIQUE KEY `pbm` (`p`,`pboot`,`msgid`)
) ENGINE=MEMORY DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1

CREATE TABLE `fldrcv` (
  `p` varchar(200) NOT NULL,
  `cd` datetime NOT NULL,
  `cms` smallint(6) NOT NULL,
  `pip` char(15) NOT NULL,
  `pport` smallint(6) NOT NULL,
  `pboot` bigint(20) DEFAULT NULL,
  `qip` char(15) NOT NULL,
  `qport` smallint(6) NOT NULL,
  `qboot` bigint(20) DEFAULT NULL,
  `msgid` bigint(20) NOT NULL,
  `startgtime` bigint(20) NOT NULL,
  `datalen` int(11) NOT NULL,
  `q` varchar(200) DEFAULT NULL,
  `repoch` bigint(20) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',
  `c` decimal(11,3) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0.000',
  KEY `c` (`c`),
  KEY `pec` (`p`,`repoch`,`c`),
  KEY `peqms` (`p`,`repoch`,`q`,`msgid`,`startgtime`),
  KEY `qbm` (`q`,`qboot`,`msgid`),
  KEY `pbm` (`p`,`pboot`,`msgid`)
) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1

And here is the query planning I see:

mysql explain select * from fldrcv join fldsndm on fldrcv.q=fldsndm.p AND 
fldrcv.qboot=fldsndm.pboot and fldrcv.msgid=fldsndm.msgid;
++-+-+--+---+--+-+-+---+-+
| id | select_type | table   | type | possible_keys | key  | key_len | ref 
  | rows  | Extra   |
++-+-+--+---+--+-+-+---+-+
|  1 | SIMPLE  | fldsndm | ALL  | pbm   | NULL | NULL| 
NULL  | 29036 | | 
|  1 | SIMPLE  | fldrcv  | ref  | qbm   | qbm  | 220 | 
bigCell2906_flood.fldsndm.p,bigCell2906_flood.fldsndm.pboot,bigCell2906_flood.fldsndm.msgid
 
|   452 | Using where | 
++-+-+--+---+--+-+-+---+-+

BTW, here are the table sizes:

mysql select count(*) from fldrcv;
+--+
| count(*) |
+--+
| 13785373 | 
+--+
1 row in set (0.00 sec)

mysql select count(*) from fldsndm;
+--+
| count(*) |
+--+
|29036 | 
+--+

Thanks,
Mike Spreitzer


Re: idle query

2010-07-28 Thread Mike Spreitzer
I installed iostat and used it.  It showed that my MySQL data is striped 
over four devices.  During my idle query each of those four devices has 
about 25% utilization, which is consistent with the hypothesis that this 
I/O is the bottleneck.  It looks like case closed.  I am looking into 
better serverdisk and rewriting my query along the lines you suggested.

Thanks!
Mike Spreitzer
SMTP: mspre...@us.ibm.com, Lotus Notes: Mike Spreitzer/Watson/IBM
Office phone: +1-914-784-6424 (IBM T/L 863-)
AOL Instant Messaging: M1k3Sprtzr

Re: idle query

2010-07-27 Thread Dan Nelson
In the last episode (Jul 27), Mike Spreitzer said:
 Sure, `wc` is different from mysql --- but different enough to account for
 a 16000:75 ratio?

Most definitely.  wc is reading sequentially, and the OS is probably
coalescing those reads and prefetching disk blocks in 128KB chunks. 
16*128 is around 2GB/sec (iostat would tell you your actual throughput). 
You probably either have a 2gb fibre-channel card, or else wc is CPU-bound
at this point, counting each character as it streams past.  I bet dd
if=largefile of=/dev/null bs=8k would give you even more iops.  dd ... 
bs=1m would probably max out your fibre-channel card's bandwidth.  None of
those commands are doing random I/Os, though, so you can't compare their
numbers to your mysql query.
 
 Will iostat give a good utilization metric for GPFS?

For your particular query, yes.  You're doing single-threaded random IO, so
you are fetching a random disk block, waiting for the result, then fetching
another random block, etc.  100% of your time should be in iowait, waiting
for a disk head to seek to your data.  If it's not at least 80%, then your
query isn't waiting on disk I/O, and since you aren't CPU-bound, I'm not
sure what your bottleneck would be at that point...
 
 If I want to try to actually hold a 2GB table in RAM, is there anything I 
 need to set in my.cnf to enable that?

Just make sure your key_buffer_size is large enough to hold the index.  You
can find this number by setting key_buffer_size to a huge number (32GB for
example), running LOAD INDEX INTO CACHE for your index, then running show
status like 'key_blocks_used'; .

http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/load-index.html

-- 
Dan Nelson
dnel...@allantgroup.com

-- 
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org



Re: idle query

2010-07-27 Thread Mike Spreitzer
Does `iostat` consider GPFS mounts at all?  If so, how can I tell which 
line of `iostat` output is about the GPFS mounted at /dev/gpfscf ?  I do 
not see such a thing mentioned in the iostat output.

In `vmstat` output, I thought bi is in terms of fixed-size blocks, not 
I/O commands.

Thanks,
Mike Spreitzer


RE: idle query

2010-07-27 Thread Jerry Schwartz
-Original Message-
From: Dan Nelson [mailto:dnel...@allantgroup.com]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 11:31 PM
To: Mike Spreitzer
Cc: MySql
Subject: Re: idle query


iostat -x output would be helpful here, too, so we can see whether your
disks are at 100% busy.

[JS] 100% busy would be a disaster! Anything more than about 80% busy is going 
to slow things down rapidly, but by busy I mean not idle. The number of I/Os 
per second is not a good indicator, because there's a big difference between 
sequential reads, repeatable reads (that could be satisfied out of the disk's 
or controller's buffers), random reads, and writes of any of the same flavors. 
It also matters whether or not you have write caching (delayed writes) turned 
on.

Then you have to consider the effect of striping, the number of controllers 
across which the disks are spread, the smarts in the controllers (request 
chaining?) and the like.

There's also the behavior of the file system at the OS level. If reads are 
unlikely to be satisfied in the file system's buffers, then a small buffer 
pool would be marginally more efficient that a large one; if they are fairly 
localized or repeatable, a bigger buffer pool is better. A journaling file 
system is better for writing, under most circumstances.

In most cases, when a system is slow but the CPU's are all loafing it's a good 
guess that the bottleneck is in the disk subsystem.

[I was a performance consultant in a past life. In another past life I 
invented the sharp stick.]

Regards,

Jerry Schwartz
Global Information Incorporated
195 Farmington Ave.
Farmington, CT 06032

860.674.8796 / FAX: 860.674.8341
E-mail: je...@gii.co.jp
Web site: www.the-infoshop.com




You're doing ~75 I/O's per second, so it looks like you're running on slow
SATA drives (a 4500 RPM drive will tops out at 75 iops); with drives like
that, anything that forces random I/O to a large table is going to kill you.
MySQL runs a single thread for each submitted query (i.e.  no Parallel Query
option like Oracle has), so if a query needs to do 14 million random reads,
that'll be 140/70/3600 ~= 6 hours just to fetch table data (let alone
the index lookups required to find the table rows).

MySQL also only has a simple index join type on disk-based tables, so no
hash joins (which would load your 2nd table into RAM temporarily as a hash
table).  It does use hash indexes on memory tables though, so if you load
fldrcv into a memory table and join fldsnd against it, that might work
pretty well.

Another option would be to create an index on fldrcv that covers both your
WHERE clause fields and your SELECT clause fields.  MySQL will be able to
use that index to satisfy the query's requirements without going to the
table itself.  Then you can use the LOAD INDEX INTO CACHE command to preload
that index into memory.  This ends up working similar to the memory table
option (no disk I/O needed for the 2nd table), with tradeoffs on both sides
(a preloaded index consumes disk space and mysql has to keep it updated when
the table is updated, but a memory table has to be dropped and rebuilt every
time you run your main query if the fldrcv table changes often).  Which
option you choose depends on how often you run the query, and how often
fldrcv changes.

 create table fldpar (p VARCHAR(200) NOT NULL,
  rcd DATETIME NOT NULL, rcms SMALLINT NOT NULL, msgid BIGINT NOT  NULL, q
  VARCHAR(200) NOT NULL, scd DATETIME NOT NULL, scms SMALLINT NOT NULL,
  INDEX p(p), INDEX q(q) ) as select fldrcv.p, fldrcv.cd as rcd, fldrcv.cms
  as rcms, fldrcv.msgid as msgid, fldrcv.q, fldsnd.cd as scd, fldsnd.cms as
  scms from fldrcv, fldsnd where fldrcv.q=fldsnd.p AND
  fldrcv.qboot=fldsnd.pboot AND fldrcv.msgid=fldsnd.msgid;

 This statement makes a new table by joining two existing tables.  Here is
 what `explain` has to say about the select part of the statement:

 mysql explain select fldrcv.p, fldrcv.cd as rcd, fldrcv.cms as rcms,
 -  fldrcv.msgid as msgid, fldrcv.q, fldsnd.cd as scd,
 -  fldsnd.cms as scms from fldrcv, fldsnd where
 -  fldrcv.q=fldsnd.p AND fldrcv.qboot=fldsnd.pboot AND
 -  fldrcv.msgid=fldsnd.msgid;
 ++-++--+---+--+-+
---
---+---+-+
 | id | select_type | table  | type | possible_keys | key  | key_len | ref
| rows  | Extra   |
 ++-++--+---+--+-+
---
---+---+-+
 |  1 | SIMPLE  | fldsnd | ALL  | pec,pbm   | NULL | NULL| NULL
| 29036 | |
 |  1 | SIMPLE  | fldrcv | ref  | qbm   | qbm  | 220 |
bigCell2906_flood.fldsnd.p,bigCell2906_flood.fldsnd.pboot,bigCell2906_flood.fld
snd.msgid  |   452 | Using where

Re: idle query

2010-07-27 Thread Dan Nelson
In the last episode (Jul 27), Mike Spreitzer said:
 Does `iostat` consider GPFS mounts at all?  If so, how can I tell which 
 line of `iostat` output is about the GPFS mounted at /dev/gpfscf ?  I do 
 not see such a thing mentioned in the iostat output.

iostat works at the disk device level, not at the filesystem level.  If your
gpfs filesystem consists of one SAN device, then it'll be easy to find in
your iostat -x output :)  If it is spread over multiple SAN devices, then
you'll only see per-device stats.  There may be a gpfs-specific command that
can give you summary IO stats for the filesystem as a whole.
 
 In `vmstat` output, I thought bi is in terms of fixed-size blocks, not 
 I/O commands.

It looks like on Linux, bi and bo are the total disk throughput in
kbytes.

-- 
Dan Nelson
dnel...@allantgroup.com

-- 
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org



Re: idle query

2010-07-27 Thread Dan Nelson
In the last episode (Jul 27), Dan Nelson said:
 In the last episode (Jul 27), Mike Spreitzer said:
  If I want to try to actually hold a 2GB table in RAM, is there anything I 
  need to set in my.cnf to enable that?
 
 Just make sure your key_buffer_size is large enough to hold the index.  You
 can find this number by setting key_buffer_size to a huge number (32GB for
 example), running LOAD INDEX INTO CACHE for your index, then running show
 status like 'key_blocks_used'; .
 
 http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/load-index.html

Oops.  My previous email described the requirements for the prefetch index
into RAM option.  For the load table into RAM option, you'll need to
raise max_heap_table_size to a size large enough to hold your table.

http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/memory-storage-engine.html

-- 
Dan Nelson
dnel...@allantgroup.com

-- 
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org



Re: idle query

2010-07-26 Thread Dan Nelson
In the last episode (Jul 26), Mike Spreitzer said:
 A colleague is running MySQL community server 5.1.34 on RHEL 5 on a big
 Xeon-based SMP (16 CPUs, 64 GB memory).  It is taking a surprisingly long
 time to execute a query, yet is not working particularly hard at it.  I
 wonder why this might be.  Following are details.  First, some `vmstat`
 output that shows the machine is doing almost nothing (I have inserted
 some additional spaces in the header to make it line up better); it shows
 no CPU activity and very little I/O:
 
 # vmstat 5
 procs ---memory-- ---swap-- -io --system-- 
 -cpu--
  r  b   swpd free   buff   cache   si   sobibo   in   cs us sy   
 id wa st
  0  0  0 56954556 328608 104018800  2600   13011  1  0  
 99  0  0
  0  1  0 56954564 328608 10401880074 6  301  961  0  0  
 100  0  0
  0  0  0 56954564 328608 10401880073 1  287  970  0  0  
 100  0  0
  0  0  0 56954564 328608 10401880073 5  297  925  0  0  
 100  0  0
  0  0  0 56954564 328608 1040188007151  291  926  0  0  
 100  0  0

iostat -x output would be helpful here, too, so we can see whether your
disks are at 100% busy.

You're doing ~75 I/O's per second, so it looks like you're running on slow
SATA drives (a 4500 RPM drive will tops out at 75 iops); with drives like
that, anything that forces random I/O to a large table is going to kill you. 
MySQL runs a single thread for each submitted query (i.e.  no Parallel Query
option like Oracle has), so if a query needs to do 14 million random reads,
that'll be 140/70/3600 ~= 6 hours just to fetch table data (let alone
the index lookups required to find the table rows).

MySQL also only has a simple index join type on disk-based tables, so no
hash joins (which would load your 2nd table into RAM temporarily as a hash
table).  It does use hash indexes on memory tables though, so if you load
fldrcv into a memory table and join fldsnd against it, that might work
pretty well.

Another option would be to create an index on fldrcv that covers both your
WHERE clause fields and your SELECT clause fields.  MySQL will be able to
use that index to satisfy the query's requirements without going to the
table itself.  Then you can use the LOAD INDEX INTO CACHE command to preload
that index into memory.  This ends up working similar to the memory table
option (no disk I/O needed for the 2nd table), with tradeoffs on both sides
(a preloaded index consumes disk space and mysql has to keep it updated when
the table is updated, but a memory table has to be dropped and rebuilt every
time you run your main query if the fldrcv table changes often).  Which
option you choose depends on how often you run the query, and how often
fldrcv changes.
 
 create table fldpar (p VARCHAR(200) NOT NULL,
  rcd DATETIME NOT NULL, rcms SMALLINT NOT NULL, msgid BIGINT NOT  NULL, q
  VARCHAR(200) NOT NULL, scd DATETIME NOT NULL, scms SMALLINT NOT NULL,
  INDEX p(p), INDEX q(q) ) as select fldrcv.p, fldrcv.cd as rcd, fldrcv.cms
  as rcms, fldrcv.msgid as msgid, fldrcv.q, fldsnd.cd as scd, fldsnd.cms as
  scms from fldrcv, fldsnd where fldrcv.q=fldsnd.p AND
  fldrcv.qboot=fldsnd.pboot AND fldrcv.msgid=fldsnd.msgid;

 This statement makes a new table by joining two existing tables.  Here is 
 what `explain` has to say about the select part of the statement:
 
 mysql explain select fldrcv.p, fldrcv.cd as rcd, fldrcv.cms as rcms,
 -  fldrcv.msgid as msgid, fldrcv.q, fldsnd.cd as scd,
 -  fldsnd.cms as scms from fldrcv, fldsnd where
 -  fldrcv.q=fldsnd.p AND fldrcv.qboot=fldsnd.pboot AND
 -  fldrcv.msgid=fldsnd.msgid;
 ++-++--+---+--+-+--+---+-+
 | id | select_type | table  | type | possible_keys | key  | key_len | ref 
| rows  | Extra   |
 ++-++--+---+--+-+--+---+-+
 |  1 | SIMPLE  | fldsnd | ALL  | pec,pbm   | NULL | NULL| NULL
 | 29036 | | 
 |  1 | SIMPLE  | fldrcv | ref  | qbm   | qbm  | 220 |  
 bigCell2906_flood.fldsnd.p,bigCell2906_flood.fldsnd.pboot,bigCell2906_flood.fldsnd.msgid
   |   452 | Using where | 
 ++-++--+---+--+-+--+---+-+
 
 The fldrcv table has an index on precisely the fields used in this join. 
 There are about 14 million rows in that table, which is about 480 times as
 many rows as there are in the fldsnd table.  I expect the result to be no
 larger than the fldrcv table.  So it looks like the index is making this
 query 

Re: idle query

2010-07-26 Thread Mike Spreitzer
Thanks for the clues.  In this case the storage is not on a SATA disk, 
rather is it on a GPFS (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_General_Parallel_File_System) mount. This 
thing is capable of quite a lot more I/O bandwidth.  I invoked `wc` on a 
large file and it took the bi stat of `vmstat` over 16000.  The iostat 
utility is not installed there, I will look into that.

Regarding your suggestions how to improve, I suspect I will not be able to 
put fldrcv in a RAM table.  SHOW TABLE STATUS says the data_length of 
fldrcv is about 2 GB.  I will look into your other suggestions.

Thanks!
Mike Spreitzer


Re: idle query

2010-07-26 Thread Dan Nelson
In the last episode (Jul 27), Mike Spreitzer said:
 Thanks for the clues.  In this case the storage is not on a SATA disk, 
 rather is it on a GPFS (
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_General_Parallel_File_System) mount. This 
 thing is capable of quite a lot more I/O bandwidth.  I invoked `wc` on a 
 large file and it took the bi stat of `vmstat` over 16000.  The iostat 
 utility is not installed there, I will look into that.

wc is sequential (and likely is reading very small chunks at a time, no more
than 8k, which further inflates your sequential iops number), while mysql is
doing random access on that table.  Single-threaded random access is always
equal to the _average_ iops of all disks, not the total.  It doesn't matter
what filesystem you use, since you can't predict random access and each read
is going to move one of your drive heads (but you don't know which one).
 
 Regarding your suggestions how to improve, I suspect I will not be able to
 put fldrcv in a RAM table.  SHOW TABLE STATUS says the data_length of
 fldrcv is about 2 GB.  I will look into your other suggestions.

You did say you had 64GB of memory?  I wouldn't expect 2gb to be noticed at
all :)

-- 
Dan Nelson
dnel...@allantgroup.com

-- 
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org



Re: idle query

2010-07-26 Thread Mike Spreitzer
Sure, `wc` is different from mysql --- but different enough to account for 
a 16000:75 ratio?

Will iostat give a good utilization metric for GPFS?

If I want to try to actually hold a 2GB table in RAM, is there anything I 
need to set in my.cnf to enable that?

Thanks,
Mike Spreitzer
SMTP: mspre...@us.ibm.com, Lotus Notes: Mike Spreitzer/Watson/IBM
Office phone: +1-914-784-6424 (IBM T/L 863-)
AOL Instant Messaging: M1k3Sprtzr