Last week we were busy to align XtraDB performance with 5.4, now we have some results. Currently it is available as “hacks” to XtraDB (available on Lauchpad lp:~percona-dev/percona-xtradb/hacks-porting-tune if you are interested). Basically we took improvements from 5.4 and backported ones performance related to XtraDB.
Here are results for tpcc-like workload, 100W (~10GB) ( raw results and parameters are available here
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=rxUEhM2dqbX0uAfq9j6WQ_w ). Box Dell PowerEdge R900 (Does Dell have referral program ? ), with RAID10 (8 disks) on ext3, 32GB of RAM.
As you see there almost no difference and you may say what’s the reason in XtraDB ? The most interesting reason is XtraDB based on InnoDB-plugin and contains its nice features like FAST INDEX CREATION and dynamic pages. And XtraDB has some parameters like “adaptive_checkpoint” and control of “read_ahead”. And if in the same benchmark you disable read-ahead (innodb_read_ahead=none), you can see improvement about 15%
Actually control of read_ahead is very simple patch and can easily be included in 5.4 or InnoDB-plugin.
For curiosity I run the same benchmarks on ext3 vs xfs on SSD card, the results are:
- xfs is 25% faster ext3
- the gaps on SSD is more visible than on RAID10
- in the same time gaps can be smoother with disabled read_ahead, however disabling it does not show such improvement like on RAID10
I should mention I have strange results on xtradb running it on xfs on RAID10, I have results about 2times slower than for ext3. I am not sure yet – is it xtradb or xfs problem, and why it appears only on RAID10, but not SSD.