Performance Zone is brought to you in partnership with:

I specialise MySQL Server performance as well as in performance of application stacks using MySQL, especially LAMP. Web sites handling millions of visitors a day dealing with terabytes of data and hundreds of servers is king of applications I love the most. Peter is a DZone MVB and is not an employee of DZone and has posted 254 posts at DZone. You can read more from them at their website. View Full User Profile

Benchmarks of Intel 320 SSD 600GB

01.06.2013
| 3306 views |
  • submit to reddit

I have a chance to test a system with Intel 320 SSD drives (NewRelic provided me with an access to the server), and compare performance with SAS hard drives.

System specification

  • Dell PowerEdge R610
  • Memory: 48GB
  • CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5650
  • RAID controller: Perc H800
  • RAID configuration: RAID 5 over 11 disks + 1 hot spare. RAID 5 is chosen for space purposes. In this configuration using 600GB disk, we can get 5.5T of useful space
  • Intel drives: Intel 320 SSD 600GB
  • HDD drives: Seagate Cheetah 15K 600GB 16MB Cache SAS
  • Filesystem: XFS, mkfs.xfs -s size=4096, mount -o nobarrier

Benchmark:
For the benchmark I took a sysbench uniform oltp rw workload. 256 tables, 50mil rows each, which gives in total 3T of data.
To vary a ratio memory/data I will vary an amount of tables from 256 (3TB) to 32 (375GB).
As a backend database I use Percona Server 5.5.19.

I should mention that on these datasizes, sysbench workload is pretty nasty, MySQL will mostly reads and writes pages from buffer pool (replacing pages in buffer pool). This however allows us to see the best possible scenario for SSD running under MySQL, the final result will show the best possible gain.
I do measurements every 10 sec to see stability of results.

Graphical result:

Tabular:

Tables HDD SDD Ratio
32   1226 1644 1.340946
64    140  571 4.078571
96    101  506 5.009901
128    89  486 5.460674
192    79  484 6.126582
256    75  495 6.600000

As you can see, on the big datasizes we have 5-6x improvement. However on 32 tables (375GB of data), the result became unstable.

There is a graph with time series with 10 sec measurements.

It looks like we are having symptoms of the flushing problem. This is to investigate later.

The scripts and raw results are on Benchmarks Launchpad.

Published at DZone with permission of Peter Zaitsev, author and DZone MVB. (source)

(Note: Opinions expressed in this article and its replies are the opinions of their respective authors and not those of DZone, Inc.)