At 09:53 AM 4/13/2009, Jerry Schwartz wrote:
>Sorry for top-posting, but this is getting unwieldy.
>The problems with hardware in multiprocessor systems have been dealt with
>long since, assuming that Intel, AMD, et al have implemented the solutions.
>Ten years ago and more, I worked with machines capable of 128 processors and
>they seemed to work okay.
Well having a machine with 128 processors and actually getting MySQL to
take advantage of 128 processors is a different matter entirely.
MySQL does not scale well beyond 4 processors, at least not like PostgreSql
does. MySQL seems to hit a plateau rather quickly. If XtraDb's modified
Innodb plugin scales better, then fine. But I haven't seen any benchmarks
showing the speed improvements relative to the number of processors used
and is something I'd really like to see.
>Of course, there was a price difference. :<)
>As others said, the major bottlenecks are likely to be internal (to the DB)
>locking and disk access speed.
Of course. When it comes to MySQL, I would invest more money into more
memory and fast SSD drives rather than more CPU's. You'll get a bigger bang
for the buck. :)
>The Infoshop by Global Information Incorporated
>195 Farmington Ave.
>Farmington, CT 06032
>860.674.8796 / FAX: 860.674.8341
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: mos [mailto:mos99@stripped]
> >Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 5:07 PM
> >To: Andy Smith
> >Cc: mysql@stripped
> >Subject: Re: MySQL runs on 16-cores server
> >At 08:27 AM 4/11/2009, Andy Smith wrote:
> >> In what way can having more cores slow down MySQL (or any other app
> >>for that matter)? Are you simlpy referring to the fact that some
> >>mutlicore servers might be slower in single threaded preformance than
> >>a higher clocked single core system? If I have a mutlicore system with
> >>fast single threaded performance I wouldnt expect it to be slower in
> >>almost any cases with something like a mutliprocess database system,
> >>thanks Andy.
> > There have been many blog posts claiming MySQL does not perform
> >that well with multi-core processors, especially Innodb. For MyISAM the
> >problem is waiting for table locks, multi-processors are not going to
> >The best way to increase speed is to improve the performance of the hard
> >drives. The hard drives are the biggest bottleneck, not by adding more
> >processors. The new faster SSD's may be the answer. They have released
> >256gb and 512gb SSD's that are super fast and claim to have have MTBF
> >is longer than most hard drives.
> >Here are a few of the multi-core performance blogs.
> >A better way to scale MySQL is to run multiple servers on Solaris.
> >Of course you could also try the MySQL cluster which is doing the same
> >thing but on multiple machines. They get around the disk problem by
> >the database in memory. So you will get a bigger bang for the buck by
> >distributing the load over several machines and putting the database in
> >memory, rather than adding multiple CPU's. Postgresql is one of the few
> >open sources databases that will scale effectively using multiple
> >processors. I wish that was the case with MySQL, but it's not.
> >>Quoting mos <mos99@stripped>:
> >>>Using more cores with MySQL doesn't mean it will run faster. In
> >>>fact, it could slow it down. Make sure you have done benchmarking
> >>>with your current computer so you can compare the difference. InnoDb
> >>>and MyISAM don't scale well with multi-cores I'm afraid.
> >MySQL General Mailing List
> >For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
> >To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=1