3 ms·

Does the presence of a HDD or SSD across the three architectures make a difference, or is this purely a CPU problem to be solved? I see the testing made sure t

Does the presence of a HDD or SSD across the three architectures make a difference, or is this purely a CPU problem to be solved? I see the testing made sure to fit all tables in memory with a large enough innodb buffer pool, so was storage even a factor? https://dynimize.com/blog/discussions/dynimizer-mysql-cross-microarchitecture-analysis/ https://dynimize.com/blog/discussions/dynimizer-mysql-cross-... It seems to me the only system with SSDs (Ivy Bridge) sees higher transactions per second improvement than the other systems. https://dynimize.com/performanceSpeedup https://dynimize.com/performanceSpeedup

esterly 8y ago
If you have a DB bigger than RAM yes SSD makes a huge difference. I haven't considered non SSD in servers for 3 years when factoring in engineering cost https://dba.stackexchange.com/a/59903 https://dba.stackexchange.com/a/59903 see DHH circa 2009 https://signalvnoise.com/posts/1509-mr-moore-gets-to-punt-on-sharding https://signalvnoise.com/posts/1509-mr-moore-gets-to-punt-on...
davidyeager 8y ago
These specific tests we did were read only where the working set fits into memory, so SSD vs HDD doesn’t matter because they were CPU bound tests to highlight the performance improvements. So storage isn’t a factor here. If that wasn’t the case then faster storage would help make it more CPU bound and Dynimizer would make a bigger impact when using SSD vs HDD.