memcached vs tuning MySql

[Keith Smith]

Ok,  Thanks!!


On 2014-12-15 18:58, der.hans wrote:
> Am 12. Dez, 2014 schwätzte Keith Smith so:
> 
> moin moin Keith,
> 
> Your server isn't dedicated to MySQL, so don't go for max recommended.
> Determine how much active InnoDB data you'll have and allot a bit more 
> than
> that or as much memory as isn't being used for other apps, whichever is
> smaller.
> 
> http://www.percona.com/blog/2007/11/03/choosing-innodb_buffer_pool_size/
> 
> ciao,
> 
> der.hans
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I'm working on a dual quad server with 16GB RAM.  Free says it is 
>> using about 10GB.
>> 
>> It serves several websites, the main one is a very active Drupal 
>> website.  As you know Drupal is a resource hog.  This one is even more 
>> so since there is tons of modules adding to the mix.
>> 
>> I am told I should tune MySql instead of using memcache.
>> 
>> The default max_allowed_packet is 1M.  Druapl requires 16M  I set it 
>> at 32M. I page load is much faster and this is with memcache loaded 
>> and configured. Memcache is currently configured to 64M of RAM for 
>> caching.  Seems very small.
>> 
>> Drupal uses innoDB and I am reading that increasing the 
>> innodb_buffer_pool_size will lead to a bust in performance.  I assume 
>> this will reduce IO and the server load should go down.
>> 
>> There is 4GB of free RAM and the server has not used any swap since it 
>> was rebooted last night.  The innodb_buffer_pool_size default value is 
>> 128MB. Since I do not know what to expect I am thinking of setting it 
>> to 1GB and see what happens and work up from there.
>> 
>> Any feedback is much appreciated!!
>> 
>> Keith
>> 
>> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.phxlinux.org
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

-- 
Keith Smith