The only way there can be that big a difference is if there is a flushing discrepancy in cofiguration.

Have you verified your settings are actually the same, particularly the ones containing "flush" and "sync" substrings.

I seem to recall there was also a flush bug fixed since 5.5 that makes things slower since then but made 5.5 not entirely crash-safe.


On Mon, 7 Oct 2024, 18:33 cyusedfzfb via discuss, <discuss@lists.mariadb.org> wrote:
Ok, tested just now with Server version: 10.4.34-MariaDB MariaDB Server:

Server version: 10.4.34-MariaDB MariaDB Server
mysql::ping,0.0001
mysql::select_version,0.1368
mysql::select_all,0.7346
mysql::select_cursor,0.9662
mysql::seq_insert,4.4442
mysql::bulk_insert,0.6946
mysql::update,2.5573
mysql::update_with_index,0.3629
mysql::transaction_insert,4.7147
mysql::indexes,0.2814
mysql::delete,4.3666
mysql::select_version::q/s,14616
mysql::select_all::q/s,2723
mysql::seq_insert::q/s,450
mysql::update::q/s,782
mysql::update_with_index::q/s,9248
mysql::transaction_insert::t/s,424
mysql::delete::q/s,458
Total time,29.3222 s
Peak memory usage,23.82 MiB

So to update the "key observations":

- **UPDATE performance:**
    - 5.5.68: *3,895,386* q/s
    - 10.11.9: *1,418* q/s
    - 10.4.34: *782* q/s
- **UPDATE with index:**
    - 5.5.68: *4,105,436* q/s
    - 10.11.9: *8,963* q/s
    - 10.4.34: *9,248* q/s
- **DELETE performance:**
    - 5.5.68: *4,436,065* q/s
    - 10.11.9: *899* q/s
    - 10.4.34: *458* q/s

Hmm. 10.4.34 behaves much like 10.11.6, and very unlike the speedy
gonzalez 5.5.68

This is all very strange.

On 10/7/24 16:41, Reinis Rozitis via discuss wrote:
>> How can it be that MariaDB 5.5.68 is performing several orders of magnitude faster than 10.11.x for these specific operations?
> Hello,
> if you have means, could you test 10.4.34 which while EOL is the last version based on 5.5/5.6 MySQL and issues like these appeared
>
> https://jira.mariadb.org/browse/MDEV-30501#comment-272740
> https://jira.mariadb.org/browse/MDEV-29988
> https://jira.mariadb.org/browse/MDEV-26055
>
> Which while marked Closed, point to different issues/problems where situation is still unclear ..
>
> I haven't tried the 10.11.x nor 11.x but none of the short-term release branches after 10.4 have performed even close (though not that dramatically) at least for our workload, so currently stuck on 10.4.x
>
>
> p.s. sorry for not answering your questions and possibly increasing the load :)
>
> wbr
> rr
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list -- discuss@lists.mariadb.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to discuss-leave@lists.mariadb.org
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list -- discuss@lists.mariadb.org
To unsubscribe send an email to discuss-leave@lists.mariadb.org