memcached vs tuning MySql

[Bryan O'Neal]

Correction avoiding auth, etc, decreases time not increase ;)
Also if a joint use server you may find what you think is free file system
cache may not be that free so proceed with that in mind. But 90% of your
unused ram should typically go to the buffer pool.
On Dec 15, 2014 9:49 PM, "Bryan O'Neal" <
Bryan.ONeal at theonealandassociates.com> wrote:

> Tune mysql. unless you are using memcache to cache complex query results
> the mysql will usually be more efficient. However memcache avoids
> authentication, query parsing, etc. This leads to increased time as well.
> In which case, if you are ok with that, just make memcache calls directly
> to innodb.
> buffer pool should normally be 90% of available ram. This is where mysql
> caches reads and writes.
> On Dec 12, 2014 1:34 PM, "Sesso" <sesso at djsesso.com> wrote:
>
>> I would say tune mysql and then use xcache instead of memcached. This is
>> the route that I prefer to go. Since you already have memcached working,
>> use it.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>>
>> > On Dec 12, 2014, at 1:04 PM, Keith Smith <techlists at phpcoderusa.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > 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
>> >
>> > --
>> > Keith Smith
>> > ---------------------------------------------------
>> > 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
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.phxlinux.org/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20141215/e5125a88/attachment.html>