maria-developers team mailing list archive
-
maria-developers team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #06058
Re: MariaDB mutex contention (was: Re: MariaDB 10.0 benchmarks on upcoming IVB-EP processors ...)
> From the above I'd say:
> 911 928 - number of executed queries (1x LOCK_tdc per query)
> 1 835 243 / 911 928= ~2 - LOCK_open was acquired 2x per query
> 4 194 896 / 911 928= ~4 - LOCK_plugin was acquired 4x per query
>
> Most probably it means that table definition cache is full and every query
> reopens table (at least 1x LOCK_plugin), evicts some old table from cache
> (at least 1x LOCK_plugin). It may be a bug in new code.
I wonder how the MariaDB under test was compiled and what flags were used.
AFAIK by default semisync plugins are compiled in. That means that for
each transaction ha_commit_trans() will execute
RUN_HOOK(transaction, after_commit, (thd, FALSE));
It involves locking of LOCK_plugin when semisync plugin is "unlocked"
(even though it's compiled in statically).
Also trans_commit() has this:
RUN_HOOK(transaction, after_commit, (thd, FALSE));
Which also involves locking of LOCK_plugin.
Pavel
On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Sergey Vojtovich <svoj@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Axel,
>
> thanks for testing and interesting results. Though our results diverge a lot, generally I confirm that PFS is eating up 10-20% of performance and we're still slower than 5.6. But in my scenario even single thread is about 10% slower than in 5.6.
>
> Further comments/questions inline.
>
> 16.08.2013, в 18:11, Axel Schwenke <axel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> написал(а):
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Michael Widenius wrote:
>>
>>> 10.0.4 should be very soon ready for benchmarking (Tuesday or
>>> Wednesday). We are in the final stage of fixing the failing test cases
>>> after our last merge with MySQL 5.6 GA.
>>>
>>> I would just prefer to see Sergei Vojtovich push his code that changes
>>> how the table cache works.
>>>
>>> This solves the same problem as the split table cache in 5.6,
>>> but is a much simpler and better implementation.
>>>
>>> After this, I would expect that MariaDB 10.0 performance would be
>>> closer to 5.6 performance for this benchmark.
>>
>>> Axel, could you at some point run the same benchmark with MariaDB
>>> 10.0.4 and MySQL 5.6 with gprof to see where time is spent?
>>
>> I have now beefed up my knowledge of performance_schema and used it to look
>> at Mutex/RW-lock contention for readonly OLTP benchmark.
>>
>> -----
>>
>> TL;DR: 10.0.4 spends very long time in LOCK_PLUGIN, LOCK_OPEN is indeed much
>> better than 10.0.3 but not(?) nearly as good as MySQL-5.6.
>>
>> -----
>>
>> Contestants:
>>
>> - MySQL-5.6.13 (release)
>> - MariaDB-10.0.3 (release)
>> - MariaDB-10.0 r3799 (bzr trunk)
>>
>> all 3 compiled from source on benchmark machine using the same build script
>>
>>
>> Environment:
>>
>> - many core machine (32 cores, 64 threads)
>> - sysbench-0.5 OLTP readonly, 10M rows, single table
>> - mysqld bound to 48 cores (sysbench to the other 8)
>> - tested with 64 threads (this is the sweet spot)
>> - using tcmalloc (preloaded)
>> - mutexes and rw locks fully instrumented via performance_schema, see my.cnf
>>
>>
>> Benchmark results (transactions per second):
>>
>> P_S on P_S off
>> MySQL: ~15K ~18K
>> 10.0.3: ~7K ~7.5K
>> 10.0.4: ~6.5K ~9K
>>
>> After stabilizing I took 3 probes from P_S, sorting by sum_timer_wait desc.
>> Times shown by P_S are picoseconds. If this were seconds, the decimal point
>> would be in the column between "m" and "_" in "sum_timer_wait". So i.e.
>> 10.0.4 waited 242 seconds for LOCK_PLUGIN during the 10 second measurement
>> interval. Since we have 48 cores, there are total 480 seconds and 10.0.4
>> wasted about 50% of that.
>>
>>
>> Questions:
>>
>> - what is protected by LOCK_PLUGIN?
> Mainly array of plugins and array of shared objects containing these plugins,
> but see below.
>
>> - how is LOCK_OPEN split in MySQL-5.6?If some of that is now covered by
>> THR_LOCK::mutex, then it would explain why this is the busiest mutex in
>> MySQL-5.6.
> Nope. It is just split into multiple table caches (or partitioned), protected by
> LOCK_table_cache and LOCK_open. I guess we have some optimization for
> THR_LOCK::mutex which Oracle doesn't.
>
>>
>>
>> Let me know if you need more data from me or if you have ideas what else I
>> should test.
>>
>>
>> XL
>>
>>
>> Top 20 Mutexes/RW-locks
>>
>>
>> MySQL-5.6.13
>>
>> +---------------------------------------------+------------+-----------------+
>> | event_name | count_star | sum_timer_wait |
>> +---------------------------------------------+------------+-----------------+
>> | wait/synch/mutex/mysys/THR_LOCK::mutex | 3397732 | 123367802416236 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/innodb/btr_search_latch | 1632176 | 22207357475142 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/sql/LOCK_grant | 1682983 | 1526912505972 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/LOCK_table_cache | 3397786 | 1247140492941 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/THD::LOCK_thd_data | 9219327 | 1076510130276 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/innodb/hash_table_locks | 4086413 | 1026755227155 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/trx_sys_mutex | 364146 | 639270297372 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/os_mutex | 149491 | 630758755641 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/innodb/index_tree_rw_lock | 1016436 | 344264365074 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/sql/MDL_lock::rwlock | 242778 | 183463650006 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/MDL_map::mutex | 121342 | 69121460394 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/mysys/BITMAP::mutex | 242667 | 54426177477 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/fil_system_mutex | 179586 | 20229032103 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/LOCK_plugin | 121352 | 15004585617 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/trx_mutex | 121475 | 13105527141 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/lock_mutex | 121374 | 12627692868 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/buf_pool_mutex | 2240 | 228234006 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/log_sys_mutex | 540 | 119752122 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/flush_list_mutex | 704 | 86802870 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/buf_dblwr_mutex | 640 | 30728817 |
>> +---------------------------------------------+------------+-----------------+
> Indeed, strange that THD_LOCK::mutex takes so much time, never seen it in my tests.
> As well as strange that MDL_map::mutex is acquired 121 342 times whereas
> LOCK_table_cache is acquired 3 397 786 (they're almost identical in my tests).
>
>>
>>
>> MariaDB-10.0.3
>>
>>
>> +------------------------------------------------+------------+-----------------+
>> | event_name | count_star | sum_timer_wait |
>> +------------------------------------------------+------------+-----------------+
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/LOCK_open | 3334966 | 251668176449112 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/mysys/THR_LOCK::mutex | 2206782 | 2761461343332 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/LOCK_plugin | 2540899 | 1471913471196 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/THD::LOCK_thd_data | 6485120 | 770989733856 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/innodb/hash table locks | 3315788 | 674878255920 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/innodb/btr_search_latch | 1358771 | 540950632524 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/trx_sys_mutex | 380210 | 245662486416 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/sql/MDL_lock::rwlock | 191698 | 125257499748 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/TABLE_SHARE::LOCK_ha_data | 1067704 | 95258676492 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/mysys/THR_LOCK_lock | 157621 | 52329482172 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/mysys/BITMAP::mutex | 154870 | 49415303736 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/MDL_map::mutex | 79173 | 41936664096 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/fil_system_mutex | 129610 | 40258209024 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/lock_mutex | 93667 | 26848457928 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/trx_mutex | 94131 | 11398946760 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/buf_pool_mutex | 12672 | 571983480 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/buf_dblwr_mutex | 9152 | 312365052 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/log_sys_mutex | 456 | 138632868 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/flush_list_mutex | 480 | 109226268 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/os_mutex | 350 | 71117100 |
>> +------------------------------------------------+------------+-----------------+
>>
>>
>> MariaDB-10.0-r3799
>>
>> +---------------------------------------------+------------+-----------------+
>> | event_name | count_star | sum_timer_wait |
>> +---------------------------------------------+------------+-----------------+
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/LOCK_plugin | 4194896 | 242595666533160 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/LOCK_open | 1835243| 33790056812460 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/mysys/THR_LOCK::mutex | 1835221 | 3136249420092 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/sql/LOCK_tdc | 911928 | 1088553356028 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/THD::LOCK_thd_data | 5766813 | 695664363024 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/innodb/hash table locks | 2144715 | 513517462020 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/innodb/btr_search_latch | 915043 | 399309801912 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/sql/MDL_lock::rwlock | 131171 | 176610102480 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/trx_sys_mutex | 196751 | 154609451460 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/innodb/index_tree_rw_lock | 527543 | 137903039712 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/MDL_map::mutex | 158268 | 95133455712 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/fil_system_mutex | 97493 | 27285605172 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/mysys/BITMAP::mutex | 131099 | 26589125196 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/mysys/THR_LOCK_lock | 131105 | 23952666708 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/lock_mutex | 65579 | 10355822676 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/trx_mutex | 65812 | 9790097724 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/buf_pool_mutex | 11550 | 644569236 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/innodb/checkpoint_lock | 2 | 236298492 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/buf_dblwr_mutex | 3880 | 156907368 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/flush_list_mutex | 692 | 124740900 |
>> +---------------------------------------------+------------+-----------------+
> From the above I'd say:
> 911 928 - number of executed queries (1x LOCK_tdc per query)
> 1 835 243 / 911 928= ~2 - LOCK_open was acquired 2x per query
> 4 194 896 / 911 928= ~4 - LOCK_plugin was acquired 4x per query
>
> Most probably it means that table definition cache is full and every query
> reopens table (at least 1x LOCK_plugin), evicts some old table from cache
> (at least 1x LOCK_plugin). It may be a bug in new code.
>
> From 5.6 and 10.0.3 metrics I can say that they're not running out of table
> cache.
>
> If the above is true, more complex code path is executed under LOCK_open
> and may give less optimal number.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Comparison
>> ----------
>>
>> MariaDB-10.0-r3799 MariaDB-10.0.3 MySQL-5.6.13
>> +---------------------------------------------+------------+-----------------+------------+-----------------+------------+-----------------+
>> | event_name | count_star | sum_timer_wait | count_star | sum_timer_wait | count_star | sum_timer_wait |
>> +---------------------------------------------+------------+-----------------+------------+-----------------+------------+-----------------+
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/LOCK_plugin | 4194896 | 242595666533160 | 2540899 | 1471913471196 | 121352 | 15004585617 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/LOCK_open | 1835243 | 33790056812460 | 3334966 | 251668176449112 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/mysys/THR_LOCK::mutex | 1835221 | 3136249420092 | 2206782 | 2761461343332 | 3397732 | 123367802416236 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/sql/LOCK_tdc | 911928 | 1088553356028 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/THD::LOCK_thd_data | 5766813 | 695664363024 | 6485120 | 770989733856 | 9219327 | 1076510130276 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/innodb/hash table locks | 2144715 | 513517462020 | 3315788 | 674878255920 | 4086413 | 1026755227155 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/innodb/btr_search_latch | 915043 | 399309801912 | 1358771 | 540950632524 | 1632176 | 22207357475142 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/sql/MDL_lock::rwlock | 131171 | 176610102480 | 191698 | 125257499748 | 242778 | 183463650006 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/trx_sys_mutex | 196751 | 154609451460 | 380210 | 245662486416 | 364146 | 639270297372 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/innodb/index_tree_rw_lock | 527543 | 137903039712 | 1016436 | 344264365074 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/sql/MDL_map::mutex | 158268 | 95133455712 | 79173 | 41936664096 | 121342 | 69121460394 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/fil_system_mutex | 97493 | 27285605172 | 129610 | 40258209024 | 179586 | 20229032103 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/mysys/BITMAP::mutex | 131099 | 26589125196 | 154870 | 49415303736 | 242667 | 54426177477 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/mysys/THR_LOCK_lock | 131105 | 23952666708 | 157621 | 52329482172 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/lock_mutex | 65579 | 10355822676 | 93667 | 26848457928 | 121374 | 12627692868 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/trx_mutex | 65812 | 9790097724 | 94131 | 11398946760 | 121475 | 13105527141 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/buf_pool_mutex | 11550 | 644569236 | 12672 | 571983480 | 2240 | 228234006 |
>> | wait/synch/rwlock/innodb/checkpoint_lock | 2 | 236298492 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/buf_dblwr_mutex | 3880 | 156907368 | 9152 | 312365052 | 640 | 30728817 |
>> | wait/synch/mutex/innodb/flush_list_mutex | 692 | 124740900 | 480 | 109226268 | 704 | 86802870 |
>> +---------------------------------------------+------------+-----------------+------------+-----------------+------------+-----------------+
>>
>> <files.zip>
> Would be nice to include LOCK_table_cache here.
>
> Just for your reference, here is command that I use to gather stats (gives seconds out of the box):
> select EVENT_NAME,COUNT_STAR,ROUND(SUM_TIMER_WAIT/1000000000000,2) AS SECONDS,SUM_TIMER_WAIT,MIN_TIMER_WAIT,AVG_TIMER_WAIT,MAX_TIMER_WAIT
> from performance_schema.events_waits_summary_global_by_event_name order by sum_timer_wait desc limit 20
>
> Regards,
> Sergey
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers
> Post to : maria-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
Follow ups
References