Re: [Solved] Bad performance of Bayes with MySQL cluster

2009-10-30 Thread furban


John Hardin wrote:
 
 Suggestion: open a feature request bug to allow bayes autolearn to use a 
 different database connection string than bayes scoring. That way you 
 could configure all the daemons' autolearns to write to the master, but 
 distribute their scoring queries across X number of replicated slaves...
 
There are to feature requests active.
Bug 4508 asking for this problem here.
Bug 5998 asking for solving the problem with a master-master replication
database
In both Bugs there is a patch included to solve the problem. I just asked
the SpamAssassin Team if these patches will be included in SA3.3 but the
answer was:

--- Comment #6 from Justin Mason j...@jmason.org 2009-10-30 05:51:10 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
 Bug 5998. This feature will be included in SA 3.3?
Nope -- Michael is about the nearest thing we have on the dev team to our
SQL
expert.  if he vetoes it, that's a big problem

 What about Bug 4508? I like more to have the possibility to use another
 server
 for writing data than to read from.
 I'm using SQLGrey in this way today.

without someone reviewing and approving the patches, we can't apply them

So it seemed that some more people need to test the patches...

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://old.nabble.com/Bad-performance-of-Bayes-with-MySQL-cluster-tp24975811p26129756.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



RE: [Solved] Bad performance of Bayes with MySQL cluster

2009-08-17 Thread Jonas A. Larsen
 
 In case anybody else comes across the same, I've kicked out the MySQL
 cluster and now using MySQL with multi-master replication. There we can
 use InnoDB and this definitely solved all of the problems I had with
 bayes. Scantimes are now below 1 second. I don't have much load as of
 yet, so I expect this to increase somewhat during business hours, but
 all in all things look a lot more promising. I've used this howto:
 http://capttofu.livejournal.com/1752.html
 

Hi Jorn

I'm running the same kind of multimaster mysql replication scheme (my sql
ndoes are in different datacenters so a cluster was not a good option for
us)

However I've seen several reports of people having problem with bayes and
replication, since with multimaster replication you have to manually be sure
there is no overlap in row id's etc.

I cant remember 100% if it was an old issue or if it still should be an
issue, I just thought I'd send you this warning, that replication might
break if you habve a bayes DB on the dbms and the 2 masters write the same
id/token whatever to the DB.

So you might want to test thoroughly before you deploy in production, or at
least if it breaks later you might remember this mail :)



Med venlig hilsen / Best regards
 
Jonas Akrouh Larsen
 
TechBiz ApS
Laplandsgade 4, 2. sal
2300 København S
 
Office: 7020 0979
Direct: 3336 9974
Mobile: 5120 1096
Fax:7020 0978
Web: www.techbiz.dk





Re: [Solved] Bad performance of Bayes with MySQL cluster

2009-08-17 Thread Jorn Argelo

Jonas A. Larsen wrote:

In case anybody else comes across the same, I've kicked out the MySQL
cluster and now using MySQL with multi-master replication. There we can
use InnoDB and this definitely solved all of the problems I had with
bayes. Scantimes are now below 1 second. I don't have much load as of
yet, so I expect this to increase somewhat during business hours, but
all in all things look a lot more promising. I've used this howto:
http://capttofu.livejournal.com/1752.html




Hi Jorn

I'm running the same kind of multimaster mysql replication scheme (my sql
ndoes are in different datacenters so a cluster was not a good option for
us)

However I've seen several reports of people having problem with bayes and
replication, since with multimaster replication you have to manually be sure
there is no overlap in row id's etc.

I cant remember 100% if it was an old issue or if it still should be an
issue, I just thought I'd send you this warning, that replication might
break if you habve a bayes DB on the dbms and the 2 masters write the same
id/token whatever to the DB.

So you might want to test thoroughly before you deploy in production, or at
least if it breaks later you might remember this mail :)
  

Hi Johas,

Thanks a lot for your heads-up here.

Actually I was realising this myself as well, especially since Bayes 
doesn't seem to be using MySQL's AUTO_INCREMENT property for its ids. 
I've seen a few articles where the different masters used different 
offsets for their AUTO_INCREMENT columns. Frankly this wasn't going to 
work for the bayes_token table at the very least. And even if it did 
work, you'd end up with different IDs, same token and different count 
values (purely theoretical if my logic isn't failing).


For the sake of the KISS concept I decided to scrap the multi-master 
replication and made it a master-slave setup only, where all 3 boxes 
point to one master. Then the slave is present as a backup server only. 
I was expecting to need 2 masters because of performance reasons, but 
the single master works like a charm in production. I'm sticking to that 
for now and works surprisingly well with InnoDB and the 
my-4GB-huge-InnoDB.cnf (or whatever it's called).


Cheers,
Jorn



Med venlig hilsen / Best regards
 
Jonas Akrouh Larsen
 
TechBiz ApS

Laplandsgade 4, 2. sal
2300 København S
 
Office: 7020 0979

Direct: 3336 9974
Mobile: 5120 1096
Fax:7020 0978
Web: www.techbiz.dk





__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4343 (20090817) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com


  




__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4343 (20090817) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com




Re: [Solved] Bad performance of Bayes with MySQL cluster

2009-08-17 Thread John Hardin

On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Jorn Argelo wrote:

For the sake of the KISS concept I decided to scrap the multi-master 
replication and made it a master-slave setup only, where all 3 boxes 
point to one master. Then the slave is present as a backup server only. 
I was expecting to need 2 masters because of performance reasons, but 
the single master works like a charm in production. I'm sticking to that 
for now and works surprisingly well with InnoDB and the 
my-4GB-huge-InnoDB.cnf (or whatever it's called).


I assume you're using autolearning. Master+multislave can support 
distributed scoring if you're manually learning, as sa-learn can be 
configured to talk to the master while the SA daemons cal query the 
slave(s).


Suggestion: open a feature request bug to allow bayes autolearn to use a 
different database connection string than bayes scoring. That way you 
could configure all the daemons' autolearns to write to the master, but 
distribute their scoring queries across X number of replicated slaves...


--
 John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
 jhar...@impsec.orgFALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org
 key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C  AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
---
  The real opiate of the masses isn't religion; it's the belief that
  somewhere there is a benefit that can be delivered without a
  corresponding cost.   -- Tom of Radio Free NJ
---
 7 days until the 1930th anniversary of the destruction of Pompeii


Re: Bad performance of Bayes with MySQL cluster

2009-08-15 Thread Henrik K
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 07:43:37PM +0200, Jorn Argelo wrote:
 Hi All,

 I'm running spamassassin 3.2.5 on RHEL 5.3 x86_64. We have three boxes,  
 and all three of them are sharing the same bayes DB using a MySQL  
 cluster, version 7.0.6 (based on 5.1.34). The cluster has 2 datanodes  
 with a quadcore and 4 GB of memory. Everything is working fine, even the  
 AWL in SQL, except for Bayes. The bayes database currently houses a bit  
 less than 500k tokens and the database size is not very big either, as  
 the datanodes have less than 1 GB of storage in use. I've followed the  
 instructions from the Spamassassin wiki, and I also used the supplied  
 bayes_mysql.sql file to create my tables. In case anyone is interested,  
 you can find the cluster.ini and the my.cnf used on the SQL nodes here:

 http://www.wcborstel.com/web/mysql/my.cnf

skip-innodb

That's pretty much the reason. You _need_ to use InnoDB as it has row level
locking. MyISAM just kills Bayes.

 Now the problem at the first glance seems to be, from my perspective  
 (please correct me if I'm wrong), the actual queries being done. For  
 every mail being scanned by spamassassin, it seems to be doing the  
 SELECT RPAD(token, 5, ' '), spam_count, ham_count, atime FROM  
 bayes_token query every time. This effectively requesting the entire  
 bayes_token table

What you are seeing are expiry runs.

As you right now use MyISAM, the whole table is locked for such operations
so you are pretty much hosed.

In any case, you should use bayes_auto_expire 0 and run expire for example
once every night when traffic is slower.

 It seems that the query cache is either not suitable for this or I am
 doing something majorly wrong :)

You are right. Better to disable completely if there's nothing else running
that uses it and save little CPU.



Re: Bad performance of Bayes with MySQL cluster

2009-08-15 Thread Jorn Argelo

Henrik K wrote:

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 07:43:37PM +0200, Jorn Argelo wrote:
  

Hi All,

I'm running spamassassin 3.2.5 on RHEL 5.3 x86_64. We have three boxes,  
and all three of them are sharing the same bayes DB using a MySQL  
cluster, version 7.0.6 (based on 5.1.34). The cluster has 2 datanodes  
with a quadcore and 4 GB of memory. Everything is working fine, even the  
AWL in SQL, except for Bayes. The bayes database currently houses a bit  
less than 500k tokens and the database size is not very big either, as  
the datanodes have less than 1 GB of storage in use. I've followed the  
instructions from the Spamassassin wiki, and I also used the supplied  
bayes_mysql.sql file to create my tables. In case anyone is interested,  
you can find the cluster.ini and the my.cnf used on the SQL nodes here:


http://www.wcborstel.com/web/mysql/my.cnf



skip-innodb

That's pretty much the reason. You _need_ to use InnoDB as it has row level
locking. MyISAM just kills Bayes.
  
Actually I'm using NDB and not MyISAM. I need a clustered storage 
engine, otherwise the bayes DB can't really be shared. If I create an 
InnoDB table on one SQL node, it doesn't show up at the other SQL node, 
while this is the case with an NDB storage engine.


What I can do however, is point all mailservers to one SQL node. I just 
need to synchronize the bayes_token table to the other SQL node I guess. 
Do you have an idea about this?
  
Now the problem at the first glance seems to be, from my perspective  
(please correct me if I'm wrong), the actual queries being done. For  
every mail being scanned by spamassassin, it seems to be doing the  
SELECT RPAD(token, 5, ' '), spam_count, ham_count, atime FROM  
bayes_token query every time. This effectively requesting the entire  
bayes_token table



What you are seeing are expiry runs.

As you right now use MyISAM, the whole table is locked for such operations
so you are pretty much hosed.

In any case, you should use bayes_auto_expire 0 and run expire for example
once every night when traffic is slower.
  
Thanks for this, I was not aware of it. Running expiry runs manually is 
done by sa-learn --force-expiry, correct?
  

It seems that the query cache is either not suitable for this or I am
doing something majorly wrong :)



You are right. Better to disable completely if there's nothing else running
that uses it and save little CPU.
  
Good to know. There will be other applications running on it as well so 
I'll reduce the size of the query cache for a good bit.


Thanks a lot for your feedback.

Jorn



__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4336 (20090814) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com



Re: Bad performance of Bayes with MySQL cluster

2009-08-15 Thread Henrik K
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 09:50:41AM +0200, Jorn Argelo wrote:
 Henrik K wrote:
 On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 07:43:37PM +0200, Jorn Argelo wrote:
   
 Hi All,

 I'm running spamassassin 3.2.5 on RHEL 5.3 x86_64. We have three 
 boxes,  and all three of them are sharing the same bayes DB using a 
 MySQL  cluster, version 7.0.6 (based on 5.1.34). The cluster has 2 
 datanodes  with a quadcore and 4 GB of memory. Everything is working 
 fine, even the  AWL in SQL, except for Bayes. The bayes database 
 currently houses a bit  less than 500k tokens and the database size 
 is not very big either, as  the datanodes have less than 1 GB of 
 storage in use. I've followed the  instructions from the Spamassassin 
 wiki, and I also used the supplied  bayes_mysql.sql file to create my 
 tables. In case anyone is interested,  you can find the cluster.ini 
 and the my.cnf used on the SQL nodes here:

 http://www.wcborstel.com/web/mysql/my.cnf
 

 skip-innodb

 That's pretty much the reason. You _need_ to use InnoDB as it has row level
 locking. MyISAM just kills Bayes.
   
 Actually I'm using NDB and not MyISAM. I need a clustered storage  
 engine, otherwise the bayes DB can't really be shared. If I create an  
 InnoDB table on one SQL node, it doesn't show up at the other SQL node,  
 while this is the case with an NDB storage engine.

Ah right sorry.. I have no idea on NDB and how it performs for SA.

 What I can do however, is point all mailservers to one SQL node. I just  
 need to synchronize the bayes_token table to the other SQL node I guess.  
 Do you have an idea about this?

MySQL replication? Maybe search on spamassassin-users archives to find
experiences.

 Thanks for this, I was not aware of it. Running expiry runs manually is  
 done by sa-learn --force-expiry, correct?

Yep.



Re: [Solved] Bad performance of Bayes with MySQL cluster

2009-08-15 Thread Jorn Argelo

Henrik K wrote:

On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 09:50:41AM +0200, Jorn Argelo wrote:
  

Henrik K wrote:


On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 07:43:37PM +0200, Jorn Argelo wrote:
  
  

Hi All,

I'm running spamassassin 3.2.5 on RHEL 5.3 x86_64. We have three 
boxes,  and all three of them are sharing the same bayes DB using a 
MySQL  cluster, version 7.0.6 (based on 5.1.34). The cluster has 2 
datanodes  with a quadcore and 4 GB of memory. Everything is working 
fine, even the  AWL in SQL, except for Bayes. The bayes database 
currently houses a bit  less than 500k tokens and the database size 
is not very big either, as  the datanodes have less than 1 GB of 
storage in use. I've followed the  instructions from the Spamassassin 
wiki, and I also used the supplied  bayes_mysql.sql file to create my 
tables. In case anyone is interested,  you can find the cluster.ini 
and the my.cnf used on the SQL nodes here:


http://www.wcborstel.com/web/mysql/my.cnf



skip-innodb

That's pretty much the reason. You _need_ to use InnoDB as it has row level
locking. MyISAM just kills Bayes.
  
  
Actually I'm using NDB and not MyISAM. I need a clustered storage  
engine, otherwise the bayes DB can't really be shared. If I create an  
InnoDB table on one SQL node, it doesn't show up at the other SQL node,  
while this is the case with an NDB storage engine.



Ah right sorry.. I have no idea on NDB and how it performs for SA.

  
What I can do however, is point all mailservers to one SQL node. I just  
need to synchronize the bayes_token table to the other SQL node I guess.  
Do you have an idea about this?



MySQL replication? Maybe search on spamassassin-users archives to find
experiences.

  
Thanks for this, I was not aware of it. Running expiry runs manually is  
done by sa-learn --force-expiry, correct?



Yep.


  
In case anybody else comes across the same, I've kicked out the MySQL 
cluster and now using MySQL with multi-master replication. There we can 
use InnoDB and this definitely solved all of the problems I had with 
bayes. Scantimes are now below 1 second. I don't have much load as of 
yet, so I expect this to increase somewhat during business hours, but 
all in all things look a lot more promising. I've used this howto: 
http://capttofu.livejournal.com/1752.html


Thanks for the pointers, Henrik.

Regards,
Jorn



__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4336 (20090814) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com




Bad performance of Bayes with MySQL cluster

2009-08-14 Thread Jorn Argelo

Hi All,

I'm running spamassassin 3.2.5 on RHEL 5.3 x86_64. We have three boxes, 
and all three of them are sharing the same bayes DB using a MySQL 
cluster, version 7.0.6 (based on 5.1.34). The cluster has 2 datanodes 
with a quadcore and 4 GB of memory. Everything is working fine, even the 
AWL in SQL, except for Bayes. The bayes database currently houses a bit 
less than 500k tokens and the database size is not very big either, as 
the datanodes have less than 1 GB of storage in use. I've followed the 
instructions from the Spamassassin wiki, and I also used the supplied 
bayes_mysql.sql file to create my tables. In case anyone is interested, 
you can find the cluster.ini and the my.cnf used on the SQL nodes here:


http://www.wcborstel.com/web/mysql/my.cnf
http://www.wcborstel.com/web/mysql/cluster.ini

I've been doing quite a bit of research and so on. First I thought it 
were the settings of my cluster, as I knew there was a lot to be tuned. 
Things like query cache sizes, thread cache, table cache, specific NDB 
settings et cetera. Unfortunately that didn't have seemed to help. I 
came to the conclusion that the bayes table was simply too heavily used. 
I have scantimes of 30-200+ seconds with bayes enabled, while I have 
scantimes under 8 seconds when disabling bayes.


Now the problem at the first glance seems to be, from my perspective 
(please correct me if I'm wrong), the actual queries being done. For 
every mail being scanned by spamassassin, it seems to be doing the 
SELECT RPAD(token, 5, ' '), spam_count, ham_count, atime FROM 
bayes_token query every time. This effectively requesting the entire 
bayes_token table, which can take up to 10-20 seconds. Now one would 
think that this is a nice canidate to cache. I would agree, 
unfortunately the MySQL query cache is not very efficient here, seeing 
as the atime of a token is being updated continuously. In other words, 
the cache is pretty much invalid most of the time. My Qcache hits is 
also very low (I noticed 8k inserts with about 250 cache hits). It seems 
that the query cache is either not suitable for this or I am doing 
something majorly wrong :)


Here is how I came to my findings. Note I removed some SELECT RPAD rows 
to avoid spammyness (they show essentially the same as the other rows 
anyway):



mysql show processlist\G
*** 1. row ***
Id: 1
  User: system user
  Host:
db:
Command: Daemon
  Time: 0
 State: Waiting for event from ndbcluster
  Info: NULL
FROM bayes_token
   
*** 3. row ***

Id: 1464
  User: bayes
  Host: :::1.2.3.4:57082
db: spamd
Command: Query
  Time: 13
 State: Sending data
  Info: SELECT RPAD(token, 5, ' '), spam_count, ham_count, atime
FROM bayes_token
   
  
*** 5. row ***

Id: 1479
  User: bayes
  Host: :::1.2.3.4:57133
db: spamd
Command: Query
  Time: 24
 State: Searching rows for update
  Info: UPDATE bayes_token SET atime = '1250259027' WHERE id = '3' AND 
token IN ('e?5?U','?;?6','?e?F?','?
   
*** 8. row ***

Id: 1485
  User: bayes
  Host: :::1.2.3.4:57148
db: spamd
Command: Query
  Time: 18
 State: Sending data
  Info: SELECT RPAD(token, 5, ' '), spam_count, ham_count, atime
FROM bayes_token
   
*** 9. row ***

Id: 1487
  User: bayes
  Host: :::1.2.3.4:57155
db: spamd
Command: Query
  Time: 18
 State: Sending data
  Info: SELECT RPAD(token, 5, ' '), spam_count, ham_count, atime
FROM bayes_token
   
   
12 rows in set (0.00 sec)


As you can see, row #9 has been executing for 18 seconds already. I was 
first playing around with trying to create some additional indexes, but 
I've seen a couple of SELECT queries where the indexes where actually 
used and that was pretty quick. Now I am by far not a MySQL guru, so 
again, if anyone has any info in regards to creating additional indexes 
I would love to hear them. Currently I don't have any indexes other than 
those provided by the bayes_mysql.sql file.


Currently I'm running my mail servers without bayes where they are 
performing fine. Does anyone have any recommendations or experiences 
with this? Or perhaps is there more information needed? Also will adding 
more memory to my datanodes solve anything?


Thanks a lot for any feedback.

Best regards,

Jorn Argelo




__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4336 (20090814) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com