On Fri, 24 May 2013 00:42:22 +0200 Platonides <platoni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Today^W Yesterday, I was asked about some file numbers, which involved > subcategory traversing, which is an "inefficient" problem. It seemed a > good problem for comparing toolserver and labs. And toolserver db sucks: > > willow: 31m5.157s (user 0m4.038s) > labs: 0m4.271s (user 2.488) > > Toolserver was *436 times slower*. > > Surely, the labs server is better (in hardware) than the one in TS. I > don't know how many scripts were hitting the TS db, while the labs one > would be almost-idle. Still, it seems a really big gap. Do we have > something wrongly configured? Did mariadb somehow massively improve vs > mysql? Are some parameters too small? Is it just a problem that the > mysql servers are underprovisioned of ram? Almost nobody is using the replicated Labs DB yet so it's not really a surprise. Wait half a year or so then try again. I expect the Labs DB to be faster still because of better hardware, but probably not *that* much faster. BTW: If you're doing recursive traversal of categories, you may be interested in CatGraph: http://tools.wmflabs.org/render-tests/catgraph/ Ask me if you want to know more about it. This address or JohannesK_WMDE on freenode. :) _______________________________________________ Toolserver-l mailing list (Toolserver-l@lists.wikimedia.org) https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/toolserver-l Posting guidelines for this list: https://wiki.toolserver.org/view/Mailing_list_etiquette
