About writes

To keep write performance you need to have table size of all inserted tables in memory ? so usage flexview for that help only if you have table A insert heavy purged but at the same time table B would need to have less indexes and will still get same memory issues and instead of doing single write you would need 2 writes A and B ?

Partitioning have been created for this purpose so if you can find a partition key that will always insert into the same partition than you can maintain both tables in memory .

About reads .

1 - if you can put all data in memory you will be able to get 800K reads per sec . if your count , group by , etc parse more than 1M like 32 Million it will still do 50s to get you a result .

Need a lot of slaves (cores) to satisfy 100 qps /s. that possible we have clients or users having Kilo servers to satisfy such requirements

( maxscale can help keeping those slaves in sync when you have so many)

2- If you wan't to reduce the amount of servers needed for big data computing or you can't offer to put all data in memory and also can't wait those 32 sec you can use a column based storage, those tools are dedicated for processing multi millions data reads /s at the price of asynchronous ETL loading

You can try out InfiniDB. documentation and binaries can be found from the MariaDB Portal

3 - Now if you think that you don't really need to read so many records like around a Million but that you can't afford to get memory , it's interesting to use TokuDB as it will parse less record per second in memory vs innodb butwill use a lot lot less disks io compare to innodb or myisam. With heavy compression and fractal tree it is a drastic io reduction.

4- Other solution to keep memory low is using a good flash storage like fusion IO , it can produce 128K reads IO per sec using1/5 in memory that would give you still the million parse in less than few seconds.

5 - If you have access to many nodes to compute the same request , you can think spider that can split every partition into a separate server . You will end up having data back in memory and spider can help you consolidate all results performed on each server , with 32 nodes you can probably get job done on all nodes adding the time to consolidate. This would be possible on basic query plan like group and sum of a single table . but it become more interesting if you need a million record count that end up into a single partition where data stay in the memory on the destination server .

Hope it helps

Stephane.

Stéphane Varoqui, Senior Consultant

Phone: +33 695-926-401, skype: svaroqui

http://www.mariadb.com

Le Jul 3, 2015 à 11:40 PM, Roberto Spadim a écrit :

the main table have 29M rows (39GB, servers are "small" and old
(2008), 16GB ram, 8core dual-cpu xeon, raid 10 hd with 4 sata disks
250gb each, 4 1Gbps network card )
20+ process updating, deleting, inserting (oltp, 1000+ qps, i think it
will not grow with time)
5+ process running olap with big selects/group/order/min/max/sum/count
etc (some queries take more than 5 minutes to end, it's not a problem
to user, but a problem when use oltp+olap apps at same table)

today using replication to another server or mysqld process at same
machine i don't have problem, olap and oltp runs nice with different
mysqld process
but when i try oltp + olap at same table at same mysqld, locks begin a
problem, i was thinking about creating a replication at same server
but to different table (replicate table a to table b)

2015-07-03 18:28 GMT-03:00 Stephane VAROQUI <stephane@mariadb.com>:
Hi,

How many writes do you have ? How much do you plan ?
When you read how many records and what is your business case ?

/stephane

Stéphane Varoqui, Senior Consultant

Phone: +33 695-926-401, skype: svaroqui
http://www.mariadb.com

Le Jul 3, 2015 à 11:23 PM, Roberto Spadim a écrit :

i didn't tested but spider have HA/federate, maybe i could use it?

2015-07-03 18:00 GMT-03:00 Federico Razzoli <federico_raz@yahoo.it>:

I'm not sure. Flexviews should be a good solution.

Or you can used triggers to "replicate" the table instantly.

I don't understand your idea with SPIDER, how will it help you?

Regards

Federico

--------------------------------------------

Ven 3/7/15, Roberto Spadim <roberto@spadim.com.br> ha scritto:

Oggetto: [Maria-discuss] doubt - replication at same mysqld process

A: "Maria Discuss" <maria-discuss@lists.launchpad.net>

Data: Venerdì 3 luglio 2015, 22:23

hi guys, i have a doubt about

replciation on same machine, i never did

this before

i have a table running many writes and few reads, and

another process

start reading a lot, my today solution is replication on two

servers

(on same machine or other machine), the point is... could i

replicate

in same server (with only one server running / only one

mysqld

process) ?

something like change table A, and a background process

replicate to

table B? "many writes" will write at table A, reads will

read table B

(read can be out of sync)

innodb is locking a lot of rows, and myisam/aria is locking

table a

lot, both engines i have problem with lock, i consider

replication to

another mysqld process as the only solution, but i'm

considering

running only one mysqld process (if possible)

i was thinking about something like HA in spider, but i

didn't tested,

maybe with flexviewcdc i could have a materialized view "B"

of table

A?

any idea/help is wellcome

--

Roberto Spadim

_______________________________________________

Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss

Post to     : maria-discuss@lists.launchpad.net

Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss

More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

--
Roberto Spadim
SPAEmpresarial - Software ERP
Eng. Automação e Controle

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss
Post to     : maria-discuss@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-discuss
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

--
Roberto Spadim
SPAEmpresarial - Software ERP
Eng. Automação e Controle