From: Date: July 5 2008 1:55am Subject: Re: mutex contention for the query cache List-Archive: http://lists.mysql.com/internals/35810 Message-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Brian Aker wrote: > Hi! > > On Jul 4, 2008, at 7:44 AM, MARK CALLAGHAN wrote: > >> I fear that some of the hardware we are to be offered won't meet the >> needs of the software we have deployed and we will all end up buying > > If you end up with multi-core board with multi-processors, if you can > disable cores you can get a bit more performance. Crazy? Yeah, but it > happens to be where the main branch is today. There is a Stonebraker research project on an OLTP engine called H-store that partitions data so that one core gets each partition. Locking is not an issue at that point. MySQL Cluster could approximate that deployment model. > >> few changes: partition the query cache and MyISAM key cache so the one >> big lock is replaced with N locks and then use a spin lock built on >> top of pthread mutex rather than using pthread mutex directly. > > Have you started working on the MySQL Keycahe feature? That work will start in September. > > Cheers, > -Brian > > > -- > _______________________________________________________ > Brian "Krow" Aker, brian at tangent.org > Seattle, Washington > http://krow.net/ <-- Me > http://tangent.org/ <-- Software > _______________________________________________________ > You can't grep a dead tree. > > > > -- Mark Callaghan mdcallag@stripped