Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 17:10:12 +0100 From: Thomas Hurst <tom.hurst@clara.net> To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why is MySQL nearly twice as fast on Linux? Message-ID: <20040524161012.GA2498@voi.aagh.net> In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20040524081943.0343ec68@mail.ojoink.com> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20040523200223.01583468@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040523103738.01563ed0@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040522052606.0156fd70@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040521154458.01627688@127.0.0.1> <5.2.0.9.2.20040521154458.01627688@127.0.0.1> <5.2.0.9.2.20040522052606.0156fd70@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040523103738.01563ed0@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040523200223.01583468@mail.ojoink.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20040524081943.0343ec68@mail.ojoink.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* JG (amd64list@jpgsworld.com) wrote: > At 03:45 PM 5/24/2004 +0100, you wrote: > > Still, if we're going to be comparing with results from Linux which > > are near the peak of it's performance curve we don't want to be > > running in the middle of our much lower one. > > Why would you assume Linux is near the peak of it's performance curve? I don't mean generally (the curve of super-smack results across various tunings); I mean the curve you plot with a single set of tunings as you increase the number of clients; performance peaks around $numcpu clients and then drops off as you increase load -- the values being quoted for Linux seem to be around $numcpu level clients. IIRC (heh, pinch of salt time ;) at 30 clients Linux got about 55-65% the performance it got at 4 (numcpu for a HTT dual Xeon), but don't take my word for it (I'll check later if necessary, although without similar hardware to compare against I doubt it's going to be very helpful). > Nobody that I have seen so far, including myself, has even tried to tweak > Linux or MySQL on Linux beyond and out-of-the-box installation to get > results that far exceed the performance of FreeBSD. I think the most we did was use my-huge.cnf, which is the bundled config suggested for >1GB systems. You're right that there's not a lot of need to tune to get damn good results on Linux though; at least on this relatively small benchmark. > Yeah I'm sorry I flamed you there... I'm just very frustrated over here. After recompiling MySQL about 20 times in a row, I fully understand :/ -- Thomas 'Freaky' Hurst - freaky@aagh.net - http://www.aagh.net/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040524161012.GA2498>