MySQL 5.7.0 

Thanks to the excellent repository of Percona, we were able to vastly improve our MySQL benchmark with Sysbench. However due to these changes, you cannot compare this with any similar Sysbench based benchmarking we have done before.

In updating our SQL benchmarking, we first upgraded the standard mysql installation to the better performing Percona Server 5.7. Secondly, we used sysbench 0.5 (instead of 0.4) and we implemented the (lua) scripts that allow us to use multiple tables (8 in our case) instead of the default one. This makes the Sysbench benchmark much more realistic as running with one table creates a very artificial bottleneck. 

For our testing we used the read-only OLTP benchmark, which is slightly less realistic, but still much more interesting than most other Sysbench tests. This allows us to measure CPU performance without creating an I/O bottleneck.  Our humble S3500 SSDs were fast enough in this scenario. 

Sysbench on 8 tables

We used to apply all kinds of hacks to get around the limited scalability of both mysql and the way sysbench tested. Any version older than 5.5 could hardly scale beyond 8 cores. It is still not perfect, but MySQL uses the first 22 cores and 44 threads of the Xeon E5-2699 v4 amazingly well. We only get a 24% performance increase if we double the core count again with a second CPU, but we are honestly surprised that MySQL can now make good use of those 88 threads. Thanks to our better testing methods and a more scalable mysql, we can now report that the latest Xeon is capable of doubling the performance of the best Xeon that was launched 4 years ago. Well done Oracle, Percona, and Intel!

Multi-Threaded Integer Performance Application Development: Linux Kernel Compile
Comments Locked

112 Comments

View All Comments

  • jhh - Thursday, March 31, 2016 - link

    The article says TSX-NI is supported on the E5, but if one looks at Intel ARK, it say it's not. Do the processors say they support TSX-NI? Or is this another one of the things which will be left for the E7?
  • JohanAnandtech - Friday, April 1, 2016 - link

    Intel's official slides say: "supports TSX". All SKUs, no exceptions.
  • Oxford Guy - Thursday, March 31, 2016 - link

    Bigger, badder, still obsolete cores.
  • patrickjp93 - Friday, April 1, 2016 - link

    Obsolete? Troll.
  • Oxford Guy - Tuesday, April 5, 2016 - link

    Unlike you, propagandist, I know what Skylake is.
  • benzosaurus - Thursday, March 31, 2016 - link

    "You can replace a dual Xeon 5680 with one Xeon E5-2699 v4 and almost double your performance while halving the CPU power consumption."

    I mean you can, but you can buy 4 X5680s for a quarter the price of a single E5-2699v4. It takes a lot of power savings to make that worthwhile. The pricing in the server market's always seemed weirdly non-linear to me.
  • warreo - Friday, April 1, 2016 - link

    Presumably, it's not just about TCO. Space is at a premium in a datacenter, and so being able to fit more performance per sq ft also warrants a higher price, just like how notebook parts have historically been more expensive than their desktop equivalents.
  • ShieTar - Friday, April 1, 2016 - link

    But you don't get 4 1366-Systems for the price of one 2011-3 System. Depending on your Memory, Storage and Interconnect Needs, even two full Systems based on the Xeon 5680 may cost you more than one system based on the E5-2699 v4. One less Infiniband-Adapter can easily save you 500$ in Hardware.

    And you are not only halving the CPU power consumption, but also the power consumption of the rest of the system that you no longer use, so instead of 140W you are saving probably at least 200W per System, which can already add up to more than 1k$ in electricity and cooling bills for a 24/7 machine running for 3 years.

    And last, but by no means least, less parts means less space, less chance for failure, less maintenance effort. If you happily waste a few hours here or there to maintain your own workstation, you don't do the math, but if you have to pay somebody to do it, salaries matter quickly. With an MTBF for an entire server rarely being much higher than 40.000, and recovery/repair easily taking you a person-day of work, each system generates about 1.7 hours of work per year. Cost of work (it's more than salaries, of course) probably comes up to 100$ for a skilled technical administrator, thus producing another 500$ over 3 years of added operational cost.

    And of course, space matters as well. If your data center is filled, it can be more cost effective to replace the old CPUs with new expensive ones, rather than build a new facility to fill with more old Systems.

    If you add it all up, I doubt you can get a System with an Xeon 5680 and operate it over 3 years for anything below 20.000$. So going from two 20.000$-Systems to a single 24.000$ Dollar System (because of an extra 4000$ for the big CPU) should save you a lot of money in the long run.
  • JohanAnandtech - Friday, April 1, 2016 - link

    Where do you get your pricing info from? I can not imagine that server vendors still sell X5680s.
  • extide - Friday, April 1, 2016 - link

    Yeah, if you go used. No enterprise sysadmin worth his salt is ever going to put used gear that is not in warranty, and in support into production.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now