basicly i was wondering using MySQL Cluster and a Cluster MySQL for some different services. Setting the point that mysql cluster was taken in account for availability specs more than for its performance.
That said here some spec data:
hp/ibm dual quadcore with SAS RAID and 8GB of RAM. (for dom0)
OS: Centos 5.3
Virtualization: xen
for real server no SAS but SATA RAID and 4GB of RAM
I got 4 of the former and 2 of the latter.
All domus where on .img files.
Used sysbench for testing
i tested: mysql cluster on domUs, mysql on domu and mysql on real server
I got real pour performance with mysql cluster on domus no data for that, but no optimiziation was done.
Moreover consider that no optimizatino was done for none of the configurations.
No conclusion at all, more serious efforts can be done for getting the best from each donfiguration, so just get this datas as a non production test, which is what it is.
Here some numbers hope they are usefull:
***************************Mysql cluster on real server (SATA + 4GB) ********************
sysbench --num-threads=4 --max-requests=20000 --test=oltp --mysql-db=sbtest --mysql-user=test --mysql-password=*********** --mysql-host=************** --mysql-port=********* --mysql-table-engine=ndbcluster --oltp-test-mode=complex run
OLTP test statistics:
queries performed:
read: 280000
write: 100000
other: 40000
total: 420000
transactions: 20000 (440.95 per sec.)
deadlocks: 0 (0.00 per sec.)
read/write requests: 380000 (8378.12 per sec.)
other operations: 40000 (881.91 per sec.)
Test execution summary:
total time: 45.3563s
total number of events: 20000
total time taken by event execution: 181.2726
per-request statistics:
min: 5.72ms
avg: 9.06ms
max: 154.81ms
approx. 95 percentile: 10.30ms
Threads fairness:
events (avg/stddev): 5000.0000/2.74
execution time (avg/stddev): 45.3182/0.00
******************** Plain Mysql on xen domu *************************
OLTP test statistics:
queries performed:
read: 280000
write: 100000
other: 40000
total: 420000
transactions: 20000 (368.68 per sec.)
deadlocks: 0 (0.00 per sec.)
read/write requests: 380000 (7004.93 per sec.)
other operations: 40000 (737.36 per sec.)
Test execution summary:
total time: 54.2475s
total number of events: 20000
total time taken by event execution: 216.8328
per-request statistics:
min: 6.35ms
avg: 10.84ms
max: 263.48ms
approx. 95 percentile: 11.14ms
Threads fairness:
events (avg/stddev): 5000.0000/2.45
execution time (avg/stddev): 54.2082/0.00
******************* Finally mysql on real server (SATA + 4GB) ***************
OLTP test statistics:
queries performed:
read: 280000
write: 100000
other: 40000
total: 420000
transactions: 20000 (467.17 per sec.)
deadlocks: 0 (0.00 per sec.)
read/write requests: 380000 (8876.18 per sec.)
other operations: 40000 (934.33 per sec.)
Test execution summary:
total time: 42.8112s
total number of events: 20000
total time taken by event execution: 171.0977
per-request statistics:
min: 5.67ms
avg: 8.55ms
max: 133.64ms
approx. 95 percentile: 9.84ms
Threads fairness:
events (avg/stddev): 5000.0000/2.55
execution time (avg/stddev): 42.7744/0.00
2010/1/15 compdoc <compdoc@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
-----Original Message----------Original Message-----
Fhttp://www.liveleak.com/view?i=375_1263347833rom:
centos-virt-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:centos-virt-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ben M.
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 8:56 AM
To: Discussion about the virtualization on CentOS
Subject: Re: Xen Database vms
Neil:
What if it were the only "real" active vm? I know that might
sound a bit
of a waste, but I am really enjoying the backup and
duplication
abilities of running in a Xen hypervisor as well as its
other features.
It seems to be saving me a lot of time in production
settings. And there
is also a comfort level in uniformity on a LAN.
Would there still be a significant hit on resource
performance by the
hypervisor if running that database server alone in it, or
alongside a
few rarely used, lightweight or spurious vms? I am talking
about the
database activities running during the biz day and backups,
batches and
other maintenance in the off hours. Nothing urgent here,
just trying to
plan out the future, mull over the possibilities and where
to head.
- Ben
I think it could work well. Having a server in a vm makes it
more portable.
Many of my servers and services are running in vms on two
centos 5.4 servers: openfiler, efw firewall, trixbox 2.8,
SME Server (in server mode for email and spamassassin),
windows 2003 server, windows 2008 server, windows 7, and
others that aren't running.
I would suggest:
If there are a lot of temp files or disk access to the OS,
install the vm OS on a block device rather than to a file.
The storage should be on a local block device as well.
If there's a lot of lan traffic to/from the other vms,
install a 3rd ethernet card in the server that is only used
for db traffic.
I also use a virtual network that the vms can use to reach
each other. This is basically a private internal lan running
across the host machine's buses, rather than through your
network switch.
I get native performance with my set up...
_______________________________________________
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
_______________________________________________ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
