[Maria-discuss] 5.5 versus 10.0/5.6 performance issues
Because of performance issues with our DBMS we recently decided to migrate our software to MySQL or one of its forks. We would prefer MariaDB. We created a performance test suite so that we are sure to make the right decision. Beside other values our test measured the average workflow processing time including multiple database transactions. The unexpected outcome was, that we had a big difference in the processing times between 5.5 and 5.6 based databases. average-time [ms] (lower = better) MySQL 5.6 233 Percona 5.6pre 208 MariaDB 10alpha 194 MariaDB 5.5 1248 MySQL 5.5 993 (Firebird 2.5 9694) We are bound to very special hardware, the biggest bottleneck there is USB-stick based storage (cannot be changed for now). Our interpretation of the results and the research we were doing so far is, that the changes within InnoDB/XtraDB storage engine in connection with our "very special" storage solution causes this differences. Can anybody confirm that the changes had a high impact on storage mediums with slow access rates? Or does anybody have an idea if it possible to optimize MariaDB 5.5 (we would like to go with MariaDB) to get the same performance with MySQL 5.6?
Hello, You can use the Oracle InnoDB instead of XtraDB on MariaDB, it could be interresting to test if it makes a real difference on your specific usecase. To do so, you must put that in our my.cnf file : ignore-builtin-innodb plugin-load=ha_innodb.so innodb Regards. Le 02/07/2013 16:56, Puff, Werner a écrit :
Because of performance issues with our DBMS we recently decided to migrate our software to MySQL or one of its forks. We would prefer MariaDB.
We created a performance test suite so that we are sure to make the right decision.
Beside other values our test measured the average workflow processing time including multiple database transactions. The unexpected outcome was, that we had a big difference in the processing times between 5.5 and 5.6 based databases.
average-time [ms]
(lower = better)
MySQL 5.6 233
Percona 5.6pre 208
MariaDB 10alpha 194
MariaDB 5.5 1248
MySQL 5.5 993
(Firebird 2.5 9694)
We are bound to very special hardware, the biggest bottleneck there is USB-stick based storage (cannot be changed for now).
Our interpretation of the results and the research we were doing so far is, that the changes within InnoDB/XtraDB storage engine in connection with our "very special" storage solution causes this differences.
Can anybody confirm that the changes had a high impact on storage mediums with slow access rates?
Or does anybody have an idea if it possible to optimize MariaDB 5.5 (we would like to go with MariaDB) to get the same performance with MySQL 5.6?
Hi, thanks for the fast reply. We tried to build MySQL 5.6 and get the InnoDB plugin from this build. It seems the InnoDB is now always statically compiled into MySQL and we were not able to get it. Related to this topic we found this in the mysql options: In MySQL 5.6, InnoDB is the default storage engine and InnoDB Plugin is not used, so this option has no effect. As of MySQL 5.6.5, it is ignored. see http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.6/en/innodb-parameters.html I think using InnoDB from MySQL 5.5 makes no sense since MySQL 5.5 has the same slow results for us. Greetings, Werner From: Maria-discuss [mailto:maria-discuss-bounces+werner.puff=gtech.com@lists.launchpad.net] On Behalf Of Jean Weisbuch Sent: Dienstag, 02. Juli 2013 17:45 To: maria-discuss@lists.launchpad.net Subject: Re: [Maria-discuss] 5.5 versus 10.0/5.6 performance issues Hello, You can use the Oracle InnoDB instead of XtraDB on MariaDB, it could be interresting to test if it makes a real difference on your specific usecase. To do so, you must put that in our my.cnf file : ignore-builtin-innodb plugin-load=ha_innodb.so innodb Regards. Le 02/07/2013 16:56, Puff, Werner a écrit : Because of performance issues with our DBMS we recently decided to migrate our software to MySQL or one of its forks. We would prefer MariaDB. We created a performance test suite so that we are sure to make the right decision. Beside other values our test measured the average workflow processing time including multiple database transactions. The unexpected outcome was, that we had a big difference in the processing times between 5.5 and 5.6 based databases. average-time [ms] (lower = better) MySQL 5.6 233 Percona 5.6pre 208 MariaDB 10alpha 194 MariaDB 5.5 1248 MySQL 5.5 993 (Firebird 2.5 9694) We are bound to very special hardware, the biggest bottleneck there is USB-stick based storage (cannot be changed for now). Our interpretation of the results and the research we were doing so far is, that the changes within InnoDB/XtraDB storage engine in connection with our "very special" storage solution causes this differences. Can anybody confirm that the changes had a high impact on storage mediums with slow access rates? Or does anybody have an idea if it possible to optimize MariaDB 5.5 (we would like to go with MariaDB) to get the same performance with MySQL 5.6?
you did not understand the answer! "ha_innodb.so" is part of *MariaDB 5.5* InnoDB instead of XtraDB does not make sense in context of MySQL 5.6
You can use the Oracle InnoDB instead of XtraDB on MariaDB, it could be interresting to test if it makes a real difference on your specific usecase.
To do so, you must put that in our my.cnf file : ignore-builtin-innodb plugin-load=ha_innodb.so innodb
Am 03.07.2013 11:40, schrieb Puff:
thanks for the fast reply.
We tried to build MySQL 5.6 and get the InnoDB plugin from this build. It seems the InnoDB is now always statically compiled into MySQL and we were not able to get it.
Related to this topic we found this in the mysql options:
In MySQL 5.6, |*InnoDB*| is the default storage engine and |*InnoDB Plugin*| is not used, so this option has no effect. As of MySQL 5.6.5, it is ignored.
see http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.6/en/innodb-parameters.html
I think using InnoDB from MySQL 5.5 makes no sense since MySQL 5.5 has the same slow results for us.
*From:*Maria-discuss [mailto:maria-discuss-bounces+werner.puff=gtech.com@lists.launchpad.net] *On Behalf Of *Jean Weisbuch *Sent:* Dienstag, 02. Juli 2013 17:45 *To:* maria-discuss@lists.launchpad.net *Subject:* Re: [Maria-discuss] 5.5 versus 10.0/5.6 performance issues
Hello,
You can use the Oracle InnoDB instead of XtraDB on MariaDB, it could be interresting to test if it makes a real difference on your specific usecase.
To do so, you must put that in our my.cnf file : ignore-builtin-innodb plugin-load=ha_innodb.so innodb
Regards.
Le 02/07/2013 16:56, Puff, Werner a écrit :
Because of performance issues with our DBMS we recently decided to migrate our software to MySQL or one of its forks. We would prefer MariaDB.
We created a performance test suite so that we are sure to make the right decision.
Beside other values our test measured the average workflow processing time including multiple database transactions. The unexpected outcome was, that we had a big difference in the processing times between 5.5 and 5.6 based databases.
average-time [ms]
(lower = better)
MySQL 5.6 233
Percona 5.6pre 208
MariaDB 10alpha 194
MariaDB 5.5 1248
MySQL 5.5 993
(Firebird 2.5 9694)
We are bound to very special hardware, the biggest bottleneck there is USB-stick based storage (cannot be changed for now).
Our interpretation of the results and the research we were doing so far is, that the changes within InnoDB/XtraDB storage engine in connection with our "very special" storage solution causes this differences.
Can anybody confirm that the changes had a high impact on storage mediums with slow access rates?
Or does anybody have an idea if it possible to optimize MariaDB 5.5 (we would like to go with MariaDB) to get the same performance with MySQL 5.6?
Hi, sorry if I misunderstood that. I thought that our test with MySQL 5.5 showed that the related InnoDB version is slow for us. Anyway we did the test, and the results are as expected: Average workflow processing time: MariaDB 5.5 with InnoDB: 1207ms -----Original Message----- From: Maria-discuss [mailto:maria-discuss-bounces+werner.puff=gtech.com@lists.launchpad.net] On Behalf Of Reindl Harald Sent: Mittwoch, 03. Juli 2013 11:45 To: maria-discuss@lists.launchpad.net Subject: Re: [Maria-discuss] 5.5 versus 10.0/5.6 performance issues you did not understand the answer! "ha_innodb.so" is part of *MariaDB 5.5* InnoDB instead of XtraDB does not make sense in context of MySQL 5.6
You can use the Oracle InnoDB instead of XtraDB on MariaDB, it could be interresting to test if it makes a real difference on your specific usecase.
To do so, you must put that in our my.cnf file : ignore-builtin-innodb plugin-load=ha_innodb.so innodb
Am 03.07.2013 11:40, schrieb Puff:
thanks for the fast reply.
We tried to build MySQL 5.6 and get the InnoDB plugin from this build. It seems the InnoDB is now always statically compiled into MySQL and we were not able to get it.
Related to this topic we found this in the mysql options:
In MySQL 5.6, |*InnoDB*| is the default storage engine and |*InnoDB Plugin*| is not used, so this option has no effect. As of MySQL 5.6.5, it is ignored.
see http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.6/en/innodb-parameters.html
I think using InnoDB from MySQL 5.5 makes no sense since MySQL 5.5 has the same slow results for us.
*From:*Maria-discuss [mailto:maria-discuss-bounces+werner.puff=gtech.com@lists.launchpad.ne t] *On Behalf Of *Jean Weisbuch *Sent:* Dienstag, 02. Juli 2013 17:45 *To:* maria-discuss@lists.launchpad.net *Subject:* Re: [Maria-discuss] 5.5 versus 10.0/5.6 performance issues
Hello,
You can use the Oracle InnoDB instead of XtraDB on MariaDB, it could be interresting to test if it makes a real difference on your specific usecase.
To do so, you must put that in our my.cnf file : ignore-builtin-innodb plugin-load=ha_innodb.so innodb
Regards.
Le 02/07/2013 16:56, Puff, Werner a écrit :
Because of performance issues with our DBMS we recently decided to migrate our software to MySQL or one of its forks. We would prefer MariaDB.
We created a performance test suite so that we are sure to make the right decision.
Beside other values our test measured the average workflow processing time including multiple database transactions. The unexpected outcome was, that we had a big difference in the processing times between 5.5 and 5.6 based databases.
average-time [ms]
(lower = better)
MySQL 5.6 233
Percona 5.6pre 208
MariaDB 10alpha 194
MariaDB 5.5 1248
MySQL 5.5 993
(Firebird 2.5 9694)
We are bound to very special hardware, the biggest bottleneck there is USB-stick based storage (cannot be changed for now).
Our interpretation of the results and the research we were doing so far is, that the changes within InnoDB/XtraDB storage engine in connection with our "very special" storage solution causes this differences.
Can anybody confirm that the changes had a high impact on storage mediums with slow access rates?
Or does anybody have an idea if it possible to optimize MariaDB 5.5 (we would like to go with MariaDB) to get the same performance with MySQL 5.6?
participants (3)
-
Jean Weisbuch -
Puff, Werner -
Reindl Harald