- the worst case overhead was ~5.5%
- a typical overhead was ~2%
- QPS was similar between the kernel with the Meltdown fix disabled and the old kernel
- the overhead with too much concurrency (8 clients) wasn't worse than than the overhead without too much concurrency (1 or 2 clients)
Configuration
My usage of sysbench is described here. The servers are described here. For this test I used the core i3 NUC (NUC5i3ryh) with Ubuntu 16.04. I have 3 such servers and ran tests with the fix enabled (kernel 4.4.0-109), the fix disabled via pti=off (kernel 4.4.0-109) and the old kernel (4.4.0-38) that doesn't have the fix. From cat /proc/cpuinfo I see pcid.
The servers have 2 cores and 4 HW threads. I normally use them for low-concurrency benchmarks with 1 or 2 concurrent database clients. For this test I used 1, 2 and 8 concurrent clients to determine whether more concurrency and more mutex contention would cause more of a performance loss.
The sysbench test was configured to use 1 table with 4M rows and InnoDB. The InnoDB buffer pool was large enough to cache the table. The sysbench client runs on the same host as mysqld.
Results
My usage of sysbench is described here which explains the tests that I list below. Each test has QPS for 1, 2 and 8 concurrent clients. Results are provided for
- pti enabled - kernel 4.4.0-109 with the Meltdown fix enabled
- pti disabled - kernel 4.4.0-109 with the Meltdown fix disabled via pti=off
- old kernel, no pti - kernel 4.4.0-38 which doesn't have the Meltdown fix
After each of the QPS sections, there are two lines for QPS ratios. The first line compares the QPS for the kernel with the Meltdown fix enabled vs disabled. The second line compares the QPS for the kernel with the Meltdown fix vs the old kernel. A value less than one means that MySQL gets less QPS with the Meltdown fix.
update-inlist
1 2 8 concurrency
2039 2238 2388 pti enabled
2049 2449 2369 pti disabled
2059 2199 2397 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.995 0.913 1.008 qps ratio: pti on/off
0.990 1.017 0.996 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
update-one
1 2 8 concurrency
8086 11407 9498 pti enabled
8234 11683 9748 pti disabled
8215 11708 9755 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.982 0.976 0.974 qps ratio: pti on/off
0.984 0.974 0.973 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
update-index
1 2 8 concurrency
2944 4528 7330 pti enabled
3022 4664 7504 pti disabled
3020 4784 7555 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.974 0.970 0.976 qps ratio: pti on/off
0.974 0.946 0.970 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
update-nonindex
1 2 8 concurrency
6310 8688 12600 pti enabled
6103 8482 11900 pti disabled
6374 8723 12142 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
1.033 1.024 1.058 qps ratio: pti on/off
0.989 0.995 1.037 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
delete
1 2 8 concurrency
12348 17087 23670 pti enabled
12568 17342 24448 pti disabled
12665 17749 24499 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.982 0.985 0.968 qps ratio: pti on/off
0.974 0.962 0.966 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
read-write range=100
1 2 8 concurrency
9999 14973 21618 pti enabled
10177 15239 22088 pti disabled
10209 15249 22153 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.982 0.982 0.978 qps ratio: pti on/off
0.979 0.981 0.975 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
read-write range=10000
1 2 8 concurrency
430 762 865 pti enabled
438 777 881 pti disabled
439 777 882 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.981 0.980 0.981 qps ratio: pti on/off
0.979 0.980 0.980 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
read-only range=100
1 2 8 concurrency
10472 19016 26631 pti enabled
10588 20124 27587 pti disabled
11290 20153 27796 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.989 0.944 0.965 qps ratio: pti on/off
0.927 0.943 0.958 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
read-only.pre range=10000
1 2 8 concurrency
346 622 704 pti enabled
359 640 714 pti disabled
356 631 715 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.963 0.971 0.985 qps ratio: pti on/off
0.971 0.985 0.984 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
read-only range=10000
1 2 8 concurrency
347 621 703 pti enabled
354 633 716 pti disabled
354 638 716 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.980 0.981 0.988 qps ratio: pti on/off
0.980 0.973 0.981 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
point-query.pre
1 2 8 concurrency
16104 29540 46863 pti enabled
16716 30052 49404 pti disabled
16605 30392 49872 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.963 0.982 0.948 qps ratio: pti on/off
0.969 0.971 0.939 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
point-query
1 2 8 concurrency
16240 29359 47141 pti enabled
16640 29785 49015 pti disabled
16369 30226 49530 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.975 0.985 0.961 qps ratio: pti on/off
0.992 0.971 0.951 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
random-points.pre
1 2 8 concurrency
2756 5202 6211 pti enabled
2764 5216 6245 pti disabled
2679 5130 6188 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.997 0.997 0.994 qps ratio: pti on/off
1.028 1.014 1.003 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
random-points
1 2 8 concurrency
2763 5177 6191 pti enabled
2768 5188 6238 pti disabled
2701 5076 6182 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.998 0.997 0.992 qps ratio: pti on/off
1.022 1.019 1.001 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
hot-points
1 2 8 concurrency
3414 6533 7285 pti enabled
3466 6623 7287 pti disabled
3288 6312 6998 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.984 0.986 0.999 qps ratio: pti on/off
1.038 1.035 1.041 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
insert
1 2 8 concurrency
7612 10051 11943 pti enabled
7713 10150 12322 pti disabled
7834 10243 12514 old kernel, no pti
----- ----- -----
0.986 0.990 0.969 qps ratio: pti on/off
0.971 0.981 0.954 qps ratio: pti on / old kernel
%20_%20(QPS%20for%208.0.34).png)
Thank you Mark very much for all these benchmarks.
ReplyDelete"From cat /proc/cpuinfo I see pcid." - does it really mean, that the kernel uses PCID? I supposed that it just means that the CPU supports PCID and then it's up to the kernel if it employs it or not.
Asking my local experts now. All I have so far is https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mechanical-sympathy/L9mHTbeQLNU
DeleteIt seems that our system (Centos7/RHEL7) includes the backported patch with PCID too. Despite the fact that kernel number is much older (3.10 ...). Thank you for that link, was very useful for me.
DeleteInteresting post about benchmarks, thank you for all these benchmarks.
ReplyDelete