List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Adam Goldstein Date:February 18 2004 8:08pm
Subject:Re: Performance Benchmarks
View as plain text  
What about a baseline of benchmerks for common, recent hardware using 
the sql-bench tools?

I can't find anything like that- It would be nice to know how my 
setup/server compares to other servers of the same or similar

Adam Goldstein
White Wolf Networks

On Feb 16, 2004, at 1:52 AM, Chris Nolan wrote:

> Ahh, the infamous JDBC benchmark. :-)
> There's been much commentary on this in the past. There are some things
> to consider:
> 1. The native APIs for each DB will be faster.
> 2. The DB, App Server and Web Server were all on one box.
> 3. I'm not sure if the MySQL JDBC driver supported the NamedPipeFactory
> class at the time those benchmarks were taken. If it didn't, then what
> you are seeing is an upper-bound imposed by I/O restrictions.
> 4. In MySQL 4.1.1, InnoDB is able to further benefit from the query
> cache, as it can now use it outside of autocommit mode.
> 5. This was done on Windows - scalability may be different on different
> operating systems (Linux 2.6 and FreeBSD 5.2 are likely to be much
> better).
> 6. Interestingly, the performance of MySQL dropped by two thirds when
> the query cache was disabled - this sounds a bit weird as none of the
> other databases have this sort of mechanism in place yet performed
> better than 1/3 of the level of MySQL.
> 7. The JDBC driver has improved in performance since this test, across
> the board.
> 8. MySQL 4.1.1 adds vastly improved FULLTEXT capabilities as well as
> nested queries. These two additions may be of great benefit to some
> applications (and basing development on MySQL 4.1.x may result in being
> able to ship around the time 4.1 is declared production ready depending
> on the development time involved).
> I'm not sure if all aspects of this benchmark have been discussed.
> Heikki has said that the performance of MySQL shouldn't have changed
> between 4.0.0 and 4.0.16 (4.0.16 was the current version when I asked).
> The fact that the query cache being turned off caused such a large
> performance drop and that MySQL scaled so closely to Oracle even though
> the two engines have such different workings points to the limit in 
> this
> case being the JDBC element of the test.
> As I've said in other threads, I can't wait for MySQL AB to release
> their new benchmarks - it will hopefully give us a simple, definitive
> source for comparison across architectures, operating systems and 
> access
> methods.
> Regards,
> Chris
> On Mon, 2004-02-16 at 15:08, Daniel Kasak wrote:
>> Rodrigo Galindez wrote:
>>> List,
>>>   Is there a site where I can see performance benchmarks on mySQL
>>> vs. MS SQL Server 2000 ? We plan to migrate a database that's now
>>> running under SQL Server 2000 to mySQL, because of online hosting
>>> costs, but our boss is not so sure of doing that, he feels "safe"
>>> working under SQL Server 2000.
>>>   Sorry is this is a newbie question, this is my first work mySQL.
>>>    Cheers,
>> Click on the links for graphs.
>> -- 
>> Daniel Kasak
>> IT Developer
>> NUS Consulting Group
>> Level 5, 77 Pacific Highway
>> North Sydney, NSW, Australia 2060
>> T: (+61) 2 9922-7676 / F: (+61) 2 9922 7989
>> email: dkasak@stripped
>> website:
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> -- 
>> MySQL General Mailing List
>> For list archives:
>> To unsubscribe:
> -- 
> MySQL General Mailing List
> For list archives:
> To unsubscribe:    

Performance BenchmarksRodrigo Galindez16 Feb
  • Re: Performance BenchmarksDaniel Kasak16 Feb
    • Re: Performance BenchmarksRodrigo Galindez16 Feb
    • Re: Performance BenchmarksChris Nolan16 Feb
      • Re: Performance BenchmarksAdam Goldstein18 Feb
        • Re: Performance BenchmarksSasha Pachev18 Feb