Feb
12
2018
--

Amazon may be developing AI chips for Alexa

 The Information has a report this morning that Amazon is working on building AI chips for the Echo, which would allow Alexa to more quickly parse information and get those answers. Read More

Dec
28
2017
--

AWS showed no signs of slowing down in 2017

 AWS had a successful year by any measure. The company continued to behave like a startup with the kind of energy and momentum to invest in new areas not usually seen in an incumbent with a significant marketshare lead. How good a year was it? According to numbers from Synergy Research, the company remains the category leader by far with around 35 percent marketshare. Microsoft sits well behind… Read More

Dec
08
2017
--

AWS has a post re:Invent surprise as it enters the single sign-on market

 Steve Jobs used to famously end his keynotes with “there is one more thing…” AWS decided to wait a week after their re:Invent conference ended to announce their more thing when they quietly released a single sign on product for the AWS cloud yesterday.
While the announcement was pretty thin on details, it appears to be focused on providing single sign on for the AWS family of… Read More

Nov
29
2017
--

Amazon is putting Alexa in the office

 The interface is evolving. What has long been dominated by screens of all shapes and sizes is now being encroached upon by the voice. And while many companies are building voice interfaces — Apple with Siri, Google with Assistant, and Microsoft with Cortana — none are quite as dominant as Amazon has been with Alexa. At the AWS reinvent conference, Amazon announced Alexa for… Read More

Nov
28
2017
--

Best Practices for Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS

Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS 2 small

In this blog post I’ll look at the performance of Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS using different service instances, and recommend some best practices for maximizing performance.

You can use Percona XtraDB Cluster in AWS environments. We often get questions about how best to deploy it, and how to optimize both performance and spend when doing so. I decided to look into it with some benchmark testing.

For these benchmark tests, I used the following configuration:

  • Region:
    • Availability zones: US East – 1, zones: b, c, d
    • Sysbench 1.0.8
    • ProxySQL 1.4.3
    • 10 tables, 40mln records – ~95GB dataset
    • Percona XtraDB Cluster 5.7.18
    • Amazon Linux AMI

We evaluated different AWS instances to provide the best recommendation to run Percona XtraDB Cluster. We used instances

  • With General Purpose storage volumes, 200GB each
  • With IO provisioned volumes, 200GB, 10000 IOS
  • I3 instances with local attached NVMe storage.

We also used different instance sizes:

Instance vCPU Memory
r4.large 2 15.25
r4.xlarge 4 30.5
r4.2xlarge 8 61
r4.4xlarge 16 122
i3.large 2 15.25
i3.xlarge 4 30.5
i3.2xlarge 8 61
i3.4xlarge 16 122

 

While I3 instances with NVMe storage do not provide the same functionality for handling shared storage and snapshots as General Purpose and IO provisioned volumes, since Percona XtraDB Cluster provides data duplication by itself we think it is still valid to include them in this comparison.

We ran benchmarks in the US East 1 (N. Virginia) Region, and we used different availability zones for each of the Percona XtraDB Cluster zones (mostly zones “b”, “c” and “d”):

Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS 1

The client was directly connected and used ProxySQL, so we were able to measure ProxySQL’s performance overhead as well.

ProxySQL is an advanced method to access Percona XtraDB Cluster. It can perform a health check of the nodes and route the traffic to the ONLINE node. It can also split read and write traffic and route read traffic to different nodes (although we didn’t use this capability in our benchmark).

In our benchmarks, we used 1,4, 16, 64 and 256 user threads. For this detailed review, however, we’ll look at the 64 thread case. 

Results

First, let’s review the average throughput (higher is better) and latency (lower is better) results (we measured 99% percentile with one-second resolution):

Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS 2

Results summary, raw performance:

The performance for Percona XtraDB Cluster running on GP2 volumes is often pretty slow, so it is hard to recommend this volume type for the serious workloads.

IO provisioned volumes perform much better, and should be considered as the primary target for Percona XtraDB Cluster deployments. I3 instances show even better performance.

I3 instances use locally attached volumes and do not provide equal functionality as EBS IO provisioned volumes — although some of these limitations are covered by Percona XtraDB Cluster’s ability to keep copies of data on each node.

Results summary for jitter:

Along with average throughput and latency, it is important to take into account “jitter” — how stable is the performance during the runs?

Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS 3

Latency variation for GP2 volumes is significant — practically not acceptable for serious usage. Let’s review the latency for only IO provisioning and NVMe volumes. The following chart provides better scale for just these two:

Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS 4

At this scale, we see that NVMe provides a 99% better response time and is more stable. There is still variation for IO provisioned volumes.

Results summary, cost

When speaking about instance and volume types, it would be impractical to avoid mentioning of the instance costs. We need to analyze how much we need to pay to achieve the better performance. So we prepared data how much does it cost to produce throughput of 1000 transactions per second.

We compare on-demand and reserved instances pricing (reserved for one year / all upfront / tenancy-default):

Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS 5

Because IO provisioned instances give much better performance, the price performance is comparable if not better than GP2 instances.

I3 instances are a clear winner.

It is also interesting to compare the raw cost of benchmarked instances:

Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS 6

We can see that IO provisioned instances are the most expensive, and using reserved instances does not provide much savings. To understand the reason for this, let’s take a look at how cost is calculated for components:

Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS 7

So for IO provisioned volumes, the majority of the cost comes from IO provisioning (which is the same for both on-demand and reserved instances).

Percona XtraDB Cluster scalability

Another interesting effort is looking at how Percona XtraDB Cluster performance scales with the instance size. As we double resources (both CPU and Memory) while increasing the instance size, how does it affect Percona XtraDB Cluster?

So let’s take a look at throughput:

Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS 8

Throughput improves with increasing the instance size. Let’s calculate speedup with increasing instance size for IO provisioned and I3 instances:

Speedup X Times to Large Instance IO1 i3
large 1 1
xlarge 2.67 2.11
2xlarge 5.38 4.31
4xlarge 5.96 7.83

 

Percona XtraDB Cluster can scale (improve performance) with increasing instance size. Keep in mind, however, that it depends significantly on the workload. You may not get the same performance speedup as in this benchmark.

ProxySQL overhead

As mentioned above, ProxySQL adds additional functionality to the cluster. It can also add overhead, however. We would like to understand the expected performance penalty, so we compared the throughput and latency with and without ProxySQL.

Out of box, the ProxySQL performance was not great and required additional tuning. 

ProxySQL specific configuration:

  • Use connection through TCP-IP address, not through local socket
  • Adjust  mysql-max_stmts_per_connection variable for optimal value (default:50) – optimal – 1000
  • Ensure that “monitor@<host>” user has permissions as it’s important for proper handling of prepared statement.
    • CREATE USER ‘monitor’@‘172.30.%.%’ IDENTIFIED BY ‘monitor’;

Throughput:

Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS 9

Response time:

Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS 10

ProxySQL performance penalty in throughput

ProxySQL performance penalty IO1 i3
large 0.97 0.98
xlarge 1.03 0.97
2xlarge 0.95 0.95
4xlarge 0.96 0.93

 

It appears that ProxySQL adds 3-7% overhead. I wouldn’t consider this a significant penalty for additional functionality.

Summary

Amazon instances

First, the results show that instances based on General Purpose volumes do not provide acceptable performance and should be avoided in general for serious production usage. The choice is between IO provisioned instances and NVMe based instances.

IO provisioned instances are more expensive, but offer much better performance than General Purpose volumes. If we also look at price/performance metric, IO provisioned volumes are comparable with General Purpose volumes. You should use IO provisioned volumes if you are looking for the functionality provided by EBS volumes.

If you do not need EBS volumes, however, then i3 instances with NVMe volumes are a better choice. Both are cheaper and provide better performance than IO provisioned instances. Percona XtraDB Cluster provides data duplication on its own, which mitigates the need for EBS volumes to some extent.

ProxySQL overhead

We recommend using Percona XtraDB Cluster in combination with ProxySQL, as ProxySQL provides additional management and routing functionality. In general, the overhead for ProxySQL is not significant. But in our experience, however, ProxySQL has to be properly tuned — otherwise the performance penalty could be a bottleneck.

Percona XtraDB Cluster scalability

AWS has great capability to increase the instance size (both CPU and memory) if we exceed the capacity of the current instance. From our experiments, we see that Percona XtraDB Cluster can scale along with and benefit from increased instance size.

Below is a chart showing the speedup in relation to the instance size:

Percona XtraDB Cluster on AWS 11

So increasing the instance size is a feasible strategy for improving Percona XtraDB Cluster performance in an AWS environment.

Thanks for reading this benchmark! Put any questions or thoughts in the comments below.

Nov
27
2017
--

Amazon debuts Elemental-based AWS Media Services for video app creation

 Video is what consumers are paying attention to these days, and Amazon’s AWS is hoping to capitalise on that with one of its latest launches. Doubling down on its video services for media companies, app publishers — and actually any other organization that has considered launching a video service — Amazon today announced a new suite of five video processing tools as part of… Read More

Nov
27
2017
--

AWS launches Amazon Sumerian to build AR, VR and 3D apps quickly

 We’d heard months ago that Amazon would be using its Re:Invent AWS event to roll out some a new service related to building in mixed reality — augmented reality and virtual reality. And on the eve of the conference kicking off, it’s done just that. Today the company announced Amazon Sumerian, a new platform for developers to build and host VR, AR and 3D apps quickly and… Read More

Nov
22
2017
--

AWS ramps up in AI with new consultancy services and Rekognition features

 Ahead of Amazon’s big AWS division Re:invent conference next week, the company has announced two developments in the area of artificial intelligence. AWS is opening a machine learning lab, ML Solutions Lab, to pair Amazon machine learning experts with customers. And it’s releasing new features within Amazon Rekognition, Amazon’s deep learning-based image recognition platform. Read More

Oct
03
2017
--

Webinar October 4, 2017: Databases in the Hosted Cloud

Databases in the Hosted Cloud 1

Join Percona’s Chief Evangelist, Colin Charles as he presents Databases in the Hosted Cloud on Wednesday, October 4, 2017, at 7:00 am PDT / 10:00 am EDT (UTC-7).Databases in the Hosted Cloud 1


Today you can use hosted MySQL/MariaDB/Percona Server for MySQL/PostgreSQL in several “cloud providers” as a database as a service (DBaaS). Learn the differences, the access methods and the level of control you have for the various public databases in the hosted cloud offerings:

  • Amazon RDS including Aurora
  • Google Cloud SQL
  • Rackspace OpenStack DBaaS
  • Oracle Cloud’s MySQL Service

The administration tools and ideologies behind each are completely different, and you are in a “locked-down” environment. Some considerations include:

  • Different backup strategies
  • Planning for multiple data centers for availability
  • Where do you host your application?
  • How do you get the most performance out of the solution?
  • What does this all cost?
  • Monitoring

Growth topics include:

  • How do you move from one DBaaS to another?
  • How do you move from a DBaaS to your own hosted platform?

Register for the webinar here.

Securing Your MySQLColin Charles, Chief Evangelist

Colin Charles is the Chief Evangelist at Percona. He was previously on the founding team for MariaDB Server in 2009, worked in MySQL since 2005 and been a MySQL user since 2000. Before joining MySQL, he worked actively on the Fedora and OpenOffice.org projects. He’s well known within many open source communities and has spoken on the conference circuit.

 

Sep
14
2017
--

AWS now offers a virtual machine with over 4TB of memory

 Earlier this year, Amazon’s AWS group said that it was working on bringing instance types with between 4 to 16TB of memory to its users. It’s now starting to fulfill this promise as the company today launched its largest EC2 machine (in terms of memory size) yet: the x1e.32xlarge instance with a whopping 4.19TB of RAM. Previously, EC2’s largest instance only featured just… Read More

Powered by WordPress | Theme: Aeros 2.0 by TheBuckmaker.com