From 3ee9af28ae0ec77170203274aeda640f448e9278 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Caitin <34535727+CaitinChen@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 14:37:57 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] benchmark: add sysbench 2.0 vs. 1.0 (#444) * benchmark: add sysbench 2.0 vs. 1.0 via: https://github.com/pingcap/docs-cn/pull/699 * Update sysbench-v2.md * Update sysbench-v2.md * Update sysbench-v2.md --- benchmark/sysbench-v2.md | 131 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 131 insertions(+) create mode 100644 benchmark/sysbench-v2.md diff --git a/benchmark/sysbench-v2.md b/benchmark/sysbench-v2.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000..29cb71f8d5e8e --- /dev/null +++ b/benchmark/sysbench-v2.md @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@ +--- +title: TiDB Sysbench Performance Test Report -- v2.0.0 vs. v1.0.0 +category: benchmark +--- + +# TiDB Sysbench Performance Test Report -- v2.0.0 vs. v1.0.0 + +## Test purpose + +This test aims to compare the performances of TiDB 1.0 and TiDB 2.0. + +## Test version, time, and place + +TiDB version: v1.0.8 vs. v2.0.0-rc6 +Time: April 2018 +Place: Beijing, China + +## Test environment + +IDC machine + +| Type | Name | +| -------- | --------- | +| OS | linux (CentOS 7.3.1611) | +| CPU | 40 vCPUs, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2630 v4 @ 2.20GHz | +| RAM | 128GB | +| DISK | Optane 500GB SSD * 1 | + +Sysbench test script: +https://github.com/pingcap/tidb-bench/tree/master/sysbench + + +## Test plan + +### TiDB version information + +### v1.0.8 + +| Component | GitHash | +| -------- | --------- | +| TiDB | 571f0bbd28a0b8155a5ee831992c986b90d21ab7 | +| TiKV | 4ef5889947019e3cb55cc744f487aa63b42540e7 | +| PD | 776bcd940b71d295a2c7ed762582bc3aff7d3c0e | + +### v2.0.0-rc6 + +| Component | GitHash | +| :--------: | :---------: | +| TiDB | 82d35f1b7f9047c478f4e1e82aa0002abc8107e7 | +| TiKV | 7ed4f6a91f92cad5cd5323aaebe7d9f04b77cc79 | +| PD | 2c8e7d7e33b38e457169ce5dfb2f461fced82d65 | + +### TiKV parameter configuration + +- v1.0.8 + + ``` + sync-log = false + grpc-concurrency = 8 + grpc-raft-conn-num = 24 + ``` + +- v2.0.0-rc6 + + ``` + sync-log = false + grpc-concurrency = 8 + grpc-raft-conn-num = 24 + use-delete-range: false + ``` + +### Cluster topology + +| Machine IP | Deployment instance | +|--------------|------------| +| 172.16.21.1 | 1*tidb 1*pd 1*sysbench | +| 172.16.21.2 | 1*tidb 1*pd 1*sysbench | +| 172.16.21.3 | 1*tidb 1*pd 1*sysbench | +| 172.16.11.4 | 1*tikv | +| 172.16.11.5 | 1*tikv | +| 172.16.11.6 | 1*tikv | +| 172.16.11.7 | 1*tikv | +| 172.16.11.8 | 1*tikv | +| 172.16.11.9 | 1*tikv | + +## Test result + +### Standard `Select` test + +| Version | Table count | Table size | Sysbench threads |QPS | Latency (avg/.95) | +| :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | +| v2.0.0-rc6 | 32 | 10 million | 128 * 3 | 201936 | 1.9033 ms/5.67667 ms | +| v2.0.0-rc6 | 32 | 10 million | 256 * 3 | 208130 | 3.69333 ms/8.90333 ms | +| v2.0.0-rc6 | 32 | 10 million | 512 * 3 | 211788 | 7.23333 ms/15.59 ms | +| v2.0.0-rc6 | 32 | 10 million | 1024 * 3 | 212868 | 14.5933 ms/43.2133 ms | +| v1.0.8 | 32 | 10 million | 128 * 3 | 188686 | 2.03667 ms/5.99 ms | +| v1.0.8 | 32 | 10 million | 256 * 3 | 195090 |3.94 ms/9.12 ms | +| v1.0.8 | 32 | 10 million | 512 * 3 | 203012 | 7.57333 ms/15.3733 ms | +| v1.0.8 | 32 | 10 million | 1024 * 3 | 205932 | 14.9267 ms/40.7633 ms | + +According to the statistics above, the `Select` query performance of TiDB 2.0 GA has increased by about 10% at most than that of TiDB 1.0 GA. + +### Standard OLTP test + +| Version | Table count | Table size | Sysbench threads | TPS | QPS | Latency (avg/.95) | +| :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---:| +| v2.0.0-rc6 | 32 | 10 million | 128 * 3 | 5404.22 | 108084.4 | 87.2033 ms/110 ms | +| v2.0.0-rc6 | 32 | 10 million | 256 * 3 | 5578.165 | 111563.3 | 167.673 ms/275.623 ms | +| v2.0.0-rc6 | 32 | 10 million | 512 * 3 | 5874.045 | 117480.9 | 315.083 ms/674.017 ms | +| v2.0.0-rc6 | 32 | 10 million | 1024 * 3 | 6290.7 | 125814 | 529.183 ms/857.007 ms | +| v1.0.8 | 32 | 10 million | 128 * 3 | 5523.91 | 110478 | 69.53 ms/88.6333 ms | +| v1.0.8 | 32 | 10 million | 256 * 3 | 5969.43 | 119389 |128.63 ms/162.58 ms | +| v1.0.8 | 32 | 10 million | 512 * 3 | 6308.93 | 126179 | 243.543 ms/310.913 ms | +| v1.0.8 | 32 | 10 million | 1024 * 3 | 6444.25 | 128885 | 476.787ms/635.143 ms | + +According to the statistics above, the OLTP performance of TiDB 2.0 GA and TiDB 1.0 GA is almost the same. + +### Standard `Insert` test + +| Version | Table count | Table size | Sysbench threads | QPS | Latency (avg/.95) | +| :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | +| v2.0.0-rc6 | 32 | 10 million | 128 * 3 | 31707.5 | 12.11 ms/21.1167 ms | +| v2.0.0-rc6 | 32 | 10 million | 256 * 3 | 38741.2 | 19.8233 ms/39.65 ms | +| v2.0.0-rc6 | 32 | 10 million | 512 * 3 | 45136.8 | 34.0267 ms/66.84 ms | +| v2.0.0-rc6 | 32 | 10 million | 1024 * 3 | 48667 | 63.1167 ms/121.08 ms | +| v1.0.8 | 32 | 10 million | 128 * 3 | 31125.7 | 12.3367 ms/19.89 ms | +| v1.0.8 | 32 | 10 million | 256 * 3 | 36800 | 20.8667 ms/35.3767 ms | +| v1.0.8 | 32 | 10 million | 512 * 3 | 44123 | 34.8067 ms/63.32 ms | +| v1.0.8 | 32 | 10 million | 1024 * 3 | 48496 | 63.3333 ms/118.92 ms | + +According to the statistics above, the `Insert` query performance of TiDB 2.0 GA has increased slightly than that of TiDB 1.0 GA.