I fond another thing http://www.wiik.de/blog/2006/09/11/tuning-sun-fire-t2000/ There might be a locking problem in newer MySQL versions. Your problem sounds a bit like that Greetings David Am 28.01.2014 18:17 schrieb "Patrick Baggett" <[email protected]>:
> Well, if you get time (and have a recentish version of gcc), try: > > CFLAGS = "-O2 -mcpu=niagra -mtune=niagra -flto" > CXXFLAGS = CFLAGS > LDFLAGS = "-flto" > > I would try with gcc-4.8 or something. > > You can always test to see if your CFLAGS are being completely ignored by > adding "--break-my-build" or something that causes gcc to error out. Of > course, this won't help if the command line looks like "-O2 -mcpu=niagra > -mtune=niagra -flto -O0 -g", i.e. someone appends their own options that > override yours. A lot of older benchmarks suggest that Sun/Oracle's C/C++ > compiler produces the best code, but that may be moot now-a-days. > > Patrick > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Chris Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The only CFLAGS set are '-mtune=niagara' (though I did make an attempt >> adding -O3 just to see if a difference, there was not). Appears to >> not be any LDFLAGS set either (CXXFLAGS is null as well). >> >> I am only 60-70% sure I am gathering that information correctly >> however (looking in the CMakeCache.txt file, and looking at >> environment variables), I generally don't do a lot of compiling, at >> least not in the past 8-10 years so I'm a bit rusty. >> >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Patrick Baggett >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Chris, would you mind posting your C/CXXFLAGS and LDFLAGS? >> > >> > Patrick >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Chris Lawrence <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Greetings: >> >> >> >> Based on some of the discussion so far in this thread >> >> (which thank you all by the way for your input!) has led me down some >> >> holes I was afraid to go down (building from source). I'm not averse >> >> to it for technical reasons, just.. its a time consumer. :) In any >> case >> >> I did run some tests on the box, building MySQL from source with a >> >> variety of -mtune attempts (niagara, niagara2/3, etc), and >> >> interestingly enough all of those attempts yielded a system that >> >> actually was _slower_ than the 'stock' binaries distributed with >> >> Debian SPARC (Wheezy). >> >> >> >> I am currently attempting a MariaDB build on the machine, but have >> >> been running into some compile-time errors (I'm not very experienced >> >> in porting to different architectures), as I was unable to find any >> >> binaries of MariaDB (hoping its claims of faster/better would apply >> >> here). >> >> >> >> I'll drop a reply if I ever get Maria built and see a difference. >> >> Thanks again for all the input, much appreciated! >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> >> >> Chris >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 4:19 AM, Rainer Herbst >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Single thread performance of the T2000 is definatly lower than of x86 >> >> > hardware, but a factor of 30 is to high. I would have expected factor >> >> > 3-4, >> >> > maybe 10. >> >> > >> >> > We use a T2000 for LDAP and MySQL server in Solaris 10 LDOMs, and the >> >> > system >> >> > perform reasonably well. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Mit freundlichen Grüßen, >> >> > >> >> > Rainer Herbst >> >> > Zentrale Einrichtung für Informations- >> >> > verarbeitung und Kommunikation (ZEIK) >> >> > Universität Potsdam >> >> > Am Neuen Palais 10, Haus 8, Zimmer 0.70a >> >> > 14469 Potsdam >> >> > Tel. 0331 - 977 1039 >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Quoting Patrick Baggett <[email protected]>: >> >> > >> >> >> Just from reading others' questions and answers over the web, I >> >> >> wouldn't >> >> >> be >> >> >> surprised if that was the case, especially if you are doing anything >> >> >> that >> >> >> needs an FPU in there. Also IIRC, they are in-order CPUs, which >> means >> >> >> having proper compiler flags will make a difference. Stock MySQL >> from >> >> >> Debian probably doesn't have any special flags applied, whereas >> you'd >> >> >> probably want "-mtune=niagara". >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm interested in finding out the answer as well -- I've considering >> >> >> picking up a used T2-based, which has similar characteristics, since >> >> >> they >> >> >> are down to a few hundred dollars. >> >> >> >> >> >> Patrick >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Chris Lawrence <[email protected]> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> Greetings: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I have been gifted a Sun T2000 from my employer as a hand-me-down >> >> >>> piece of hardware. I have had plenty of experience using it as a >> >> >>> Solaris 10 box, and we generally ran Oracle and our in-house >> products >> >> >>> on the hardware with good results. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> After getting the hardware, without a Sun contract I went with >> Debian, >> >> >>> which was fine as my expertise/background is more heavily Linux >> than >> >> >>> Solaris anyways. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> After a lot of tinkering I got the system as I liked it, prepared >> to >> >> >>> host several LXC containers, separated as database and web servers >> for >> >> >>> a project for my friend's gaming website. All went well, until I >> >> >>> started working with MySQL. I started noticing significant >> >> >>> differences in performance, and, I went down the rabbit hole to >> find >> >> >>> plenty of articles talking about how MySQL doesn't run well on The >> >> >>> T2000's due to single threadedness sort of reasons. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I've done a good amount of fine tuning of the database, but I'm >> >> >>> finding any query of complexity taking sometimes as much as 30x >> longer >> >> >>> to execute than on same-era x86 hardware running Debian. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I am really just trying to figure out if I'm wasting my time by >> trying >> >> >>> to 'fix' this, or if its a reality of the hardware platform. Even >> >> >>> simple 'select BENCHMARK' queries are returning back after 25-30 >> >> >>> seconds, whereas on the x86 box it comes back in 1-2 seconds. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Is MySQL on this hardware platform a lost cause, or am I missing >> >> >>> something obvious? >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Thanks in advance! >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Regards, >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Chris >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> -- >> >> >>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] >> >> >>> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact >> >> >>> [email protected] >> >> >>> Archive: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> http://lists.debian.org/caouezgjvmyjpmpowtpjvafmpy0uneext3pctwxypanapdlv...@mail.gmail.com >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] >> >> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact >> >> [email protected] >> >> Archive: >> >> >> http://lists.debian.org/caouezgkkvfeo_6wocjhmtwt0nots3hhq-bpjkdzmvfmvqtg...@mail.gmail.com >> >> >> > >> > >
