PHPBLOG: February 2015

http://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/27328/how-large-should-be-mysql-innodb-buffer-pool-size

up vote31down votefavorite

I have a busy database with solely InnoDB tables which is about 5GB in size. The database runs on a Debian server using SSD disks and I've set max connections = 800 which sometimes saturate and grind the server to halt. The average query per second is about 2.5K. So I need to optimize memory usage to make room for maximum possible connections.

I've seen suggestions that innodb_buffer_pool_size should be up to %80 of the total memory. On the other hand I get this warning from tuning-primer script:

Max Memory Ever Allocated : 91.97 G

Configured Max Per-thread Buffers : 72.02 G

Configured Max Global Buffers : 19.86 G

Configured Max Memory Limit : 91.88 G

Physical Memory : 94.58 G

Here are my current innodb variables:

| innodb_adaptive_flushing | ON |

| innodb_adaptive_hash_index | ON |

| innodb_additional_mem_pool_size | 20971520 |

| innodb_autoextend_increment | 8 |

| innodb_autoinc_lock_mode | 1 |

| innodb_buffer_pool_instances | 1 |

| innodb_buffer_pool_size | 20971520000 |

| innodb_change_buffering | all |

| innodb_checksums | ON |

| innodb_commit_concurrency | 0 |

| innodb_concurrency_tickets | 500 |

| innodb_data_file_path | ibdata1:10M:autoextend |

| innodb_data_home_dir | |

| innodb_doublewrite | ON |

| innodb_fast_shutdown | 1 |

| innodb_file_format | Antelope |

| innodb_file_format_check | ON |

| innodb_file_format_max | Antelope |

| innodb_file_per_table | ON |

| innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit | 2 |

| innodb_flush_method | O_DIRECT |

| innodb_force_load_corrupted | OFF |

| innodb_force_recovery | 0 |

| innodb_io_capacity | 200 |

| innodb_large_prefix | OFF |

| innodb_lock_wait_timeout | 50 |

| innodb_locks_unsafe_for_binlog | OFF |

| innodb_log_buffer_size | 4194304 |

| innodb_log_file_size | 524288000 |

| innodb_log_files_in_group | 2 |

| innodb_log_group_home_dir | ./ |

| innodb_max_dirty_pages_pct | 75 |

| innodb_max_purge_lag | 0 |

| innodb_mirrored_log_groups | 1 |

| innodb_old_blocks_pct | 37 |

| innodb_old_blocks_time | 0 |

| innodb_open_files | 300 |

| innodb_purge_batch_size | 20 |

| innodb_purge_threads | 0 |

| innodb_random_read_ahead | OFF |

| innodb_read_ahead_threshold | 56 |

| innodb_read_io_threads | 4 |

| innodb_replication_delay | 0 |

| innodb_rollback_on_timeout | OFF |

| innodb_rollback_segments | 128 |

| innodb_spin_wait_delay | 6 |

| innodb_stats_method | nulls_equal |

| innodb_stats_on_metadata | ON |

| innodb_stats_sample_pages | 8 |

| innodb_strict_mode | OFF |

| innodb_support_xa | ON |

| innodb_sync_spin_loops | 30 |

| innodb_table_locks | ON |

| innodb_thread_concurrency | 4 |

| innodb_thread_sleep_delay | 10000 |

| innodb_use_native_aio | ON |

| innodb_use_sys_malloc | ON |

| innodb_version | 1.1.8 |

| innodb_write_io_threads | 4 |

A side note that might be relevant: I see that when I try to insert a large post (say over 10KB) from Drupal (which sits on a separate web server) to database, it lasts forever and the page does not return correctly.

Regarding these, I'm wondering what should be my innodb_buffer_pool_size for optimal performance. I appreciate your suggestions to set this and other parameters optimally for this scenario.

mysql innodb

share improve this question

edited Oct 21 '12 at 15:21

asked Oct 21 '12 at 15:03

alfish
3592717

add a comment

4 Answers

active oldest votes

up vote59down voteaccepted

Your innodb_buffer_pool_size is enormous. You have it set at 20971520000. That's 19.5135 GB. If you only 5GB of InnoDB data and indexes, then you should only have about 8GB. Even this may too high.

Here is what you should do. First run this query

SELECT CEILING(Total_InnoDB_Bytes*1.6/POWER(1024,3)) RIBPS FROM

(SELECT SUM(data_length+index_length) Total_InnoDB_Bytes

FROM information_schema.tables WHERE engine='InnoDB') A;

This will give you the RIBPS, Recommended InnoDB Buffer Pool Size based on all InnoDB Data and Indexes with an additional 60%.

For Example

mysql> SELECT CEILING(Total_InnoDB_Bytes*1.6/POWER(1024,3)) RIBPS FROM

-> (SELECT SUM(data_length+index_length) Total_InnoDB_Bytes

-> FROM information_schema.tables WHERE engine='InnoDB') A;

+-------+

| RIBPS |

+-------+

| 8 |

+-------+

1 row in set (4.31 sec)

mysql>

With this output, you would set the following in /etc/my.cnf

[mysqld]

innodb_buffer_pool_size=8G

Next, service mysql restart

After the restart, run mysql for a week or two. Then, run this query:

SELECT (PagesData*PageSize)/POWER(1024,3) DataGB FROM

(SELECT variable_value PagesData

FROM information_schema.global_status

WHERE variable_name='Innodb_buffer_pool_pages_data') A,

(SELECT variable_value PageSize

FROM information_schema.global_status

WHERE variable_name='Innodb_page_size') B;

This will give you how many actual pages of InnoDB data reside in the InnoDB Buffer Pool.

I have written about this before : What to set innodb_buffer_pool and why..?

You could just run this DataGB query right now rather than reconfiguring, restarting and waiting a week.

This value DataGB more closely resembles how big the InnoDB Buffer Pool should be. I am sure this will be far less than the 20000M you have see right now. The savings in RAM can be use for tuning other things like

· join_buffer_size

· sort_buffer_size

· read_buffer_size

· read_rnd_buffer_size

· max_connection

CAVEAT #1

This is very important to note : At times, InnoDB may require and additional 10% over the value for theinnodb_buffer_pool_size. Here is what the MySQL Documentation says on this:

The larger you set this value, the less disk I/O is needed to access data in tables. On a dedicated database server, you may set this to up to 80% of the machine physical memory size. Be prepared to scale back this value if these other issues occur:

Competition for physical memory might cause paging in the operating system.

InnoDB reserves additional memory for buffers and control structures, so that the total allocated space is approximately 10% greater than the specified size.

The address space must be contiguous, which can be an issue on Windows systems with DLLs that load at specific addresses.

The time to initialize the buffer pool is roughly proportional to its size. On large installations, this initialization time may be significant. For example, on a modern Linux x86_64 server, initialization of a 10GB buffer pool takes approximately 6 seconds. See Section 8.9.1, “The InnoDB Buffer Pool”.

CAVEAT #2

I See the following values in your my.cnf

| innodb_io_capacity | 200 |

| innodb_read_io_threads | 4 |

| innodb_thread_concurrency | 4 |

| innodb_write_io_threads | 4 |

These number will impede InnoDB from accessing multiple cores

Please set the following:

[mysqld]

innodb_io_capacity = 2000

innodb_read_io_threads = 64

innodb_thread_concurrency = 0

innodb_write_io_threads = 64

I have written about this before in the DBA StackExchange

· May 26, 2011 : About single threaded versus multithreaded databases performance

· Sep 12, 2011 : Possible to make MySQL use more then one core

· Sep 20, 2011 : Multi cores and MySQL Performance

I just answered a question like this in ServerFault using a more concise formula:

SELECT CONCAT(CEILING(RIBPS/POWER(1024,pw)),SUBSTR(' KMGT',pw+1,1))

Recommended_InnoDB_Buffer_Pool_Size FROM

(

SELECT RIBPS,FLOOR(LOG(RIBPS)/LOG(1024)) pw

FROM

(

SELECT SUM(data_length+index_length)*1.1*growth RIBPS

FROM information_schema.tables AAA,

(SELECT 1.25 growth) BBB

WHERE ENGINE='InnoDB'

) AA

) A;

share improve this answer

edited Oct 22 '12 at 19:49

answered Oct 22 '12 at 0:30

RolandoMySQLDBA
74.3k1176170

My query result times are ridiculous. mysql> SELECT CEILING(Total_InnoDB_Bytes*1.6/POWER(1024,3)) RIBPS FROM (SELECT SUM(data_length+index_length) Total_InnoDB_Bytes FROM information_schema.tables WHERE engine='InnoDB') A; +-------+ | RIBPS | +-------+ | 42 | +-------+ 1 row in set (58.76 sec) The virtualized server has 16GB of allocated RAM. What am I doing wrong? – user20958 Mar 6 '13 at 22:24

what rationale is there for the "with an additional 60%"? Thanks! – HTTP500 Nov 12 '13 at 15:56

@HTTP500 the 60% is an arbitrary number to accommodate growth. You can pick whatever number you want if you can predict or intelligently guess how much additional growth you expect. That's what the formula says Total_InnoDB_Bytes*1.6 to account for the 60%. If you want 40%, Total_InnoDB_Bytes*1.4. – RolandoMySQLDBA Nov 12 '13 at 17:13

Figured as much but thanks for the confirmation. – HTTP500 Nov 12 '13 at 21:26

Some people suggest that IOs over 200 are too much unless you have an SSD with much faster write speed. I don't know if they are correct. chriscalender.com/iops-innodb_io_capacity-and-the-innodb-plugin – Buttle Butkus Aug 24 '14 at 2:20

show 1 more comment

up vote3down vote

Your title asks about innodb_buffer_pool_size, but I suspect that is not the real problem. (Rolando commented on why you have set it big enough, even too big.)

I've set max connections = 800 which sometimes saturate and grind the server to halt.

That is unclear. 800 users in "Sleep" mode has virtually zero impact on the system. 800 active threads would be a disaster. How many threads are "running"?

Are the threads blocking each other? See SHOW ENGINE INNODB STATUS for some clues on deadlocks, etc.

Are any queries showing up in the slowlog? Let's optimize them.

What version are you using? XtraDB (a drop-in replacement for InnoDB) does a better job of using multiple cores. 5.6.7 does an even better job.

innodb_buffer_pool_instances -- change this to 8 (assuming a 20G buffer_pool); it will cut back slightly on the Mutex contention.

Are you I/O bound or are you CPU bound? The solutions are radically different, depending on your answer.

SSD -- It might be better if all the log files were on non-SSD drives.

share improve this answer

answered Oct 22 '12 at 23:19

Rick James
2,565610

add a comment

up vote1down vote

More memory is always better, but in my experience most of the times buffer pool size should not fit your data size. Many tables are inactive most of the times, like backup tables lying around, so innodb buffer pool size should rather fit you acive data size.

The time frame you specify for active pages influences the performance, but there's an optimal point, where you won't get that more performance for a bigger buffer size. You could estimate/calculate/measure that by "show engine status innodb".

share improve this answer

answered Mar 14 '14 at 10:23

user77376
1184

add a comment

up vote0down vote

Something like this? Using SHOW VARIABLES and SHOW GLOBAL STATUS:

Expression: innodb_buffer_pool_size / _ram
Meaning: % of RAM used for InnoDB buffer_pool
Recommended range: 60~80%

Expression: Innodb_buffer_pool_reads / Innodb_buffer_pool_read_requests
Meaning: Read requests that had to hit disk
Recommended range: 0-2%
What to do if out of range: Increase innodb_buffer_pool_size if you have enough RAM.

Expression: Innodb_pages_read / Innodb_buffer_pool_read_requests
Meaning: Read requests that had to hit disk
Recommended range: 0-2%
What to do if out of range: Increase innodb_buffer_pool_size if you have enough RAM.

Expression: Innodb_pages_written / Innodb_buffer_pool_write_requests
Meaning: Write requests that had to hit disk
Recommended range: 0-15%
What to do if out of range: Check innodb_buffer_pool_size

Expression: Innodb_buffer_pool_reads / Uptime
Meaning: Reads
Recommended range: 0-100/sec.
What to do if out of range: Increase innodb_buffer_pool_size?

Expression: (Innodb_buffer_pool_reads + Innodb_buffer_pool_pages_flushed) / Uptime
Meaning: InnoDB I/O
Recommended range: 0-100/sec.
What to do if out of range: Increase innodb_buffer_pool_size?

Expression: Innodb_buffer_pool_pages_flushed / Uptime
Meaning: Writes (flushes)
Recommended range: 0-100/sec.
What to do if out of range: Increase innodb_buffer_pool_size?

Expression: Innodb_buffer_pool_wait_free / Uptime
Meaning: Counter for when there are no free pages in buffer_pool. That is, all pages are dirty.
Recommended range: 0-1/sec.
What to do if out of range: First be sure innodb_buffer_pool_size is set reasonably; if still trouble, decrease innodb_max_dirty_pages_pct

PHPBLOG

Tuesday, 24 February 2015

Repair MySQL Replication slave

1 Identifying The Problem

2 Repairing The Replication

How large should be mysql innodb_buffer_pool_size?