I remember using 500 per select and the difference was significant (10x increase if not more).
Regards, Alex On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:13 PM, spameden <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 2013/7/18 Rene Kluwen <[email protected]> > >> Also gw_sql_save_msg could then be adapted to a multi-record insert.**** >> >> Which also gives a big performance boost on a large number of messages.** >> ** >> >> This is getting interesting.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Spameden: Do you have any insights about how Alejandro’s current patch >> compares to an unpatched sqlbox in terms of performance? >> > > I don't have exact numbers, but I've been using sqlbox with Alejandro's > patch with limit-per-cycle = 50 for quite a while and never had problems > with MySQL bottlenecks. > > I'd say If you have more than 10k messages in a queue and have a busy > MySQL installation (i.e. have simultaneous about 100 users on your website) > it would definitely give you a boost. > > Althrough I'm also deleting old messages from sent_sms table and > OPTIMIZE'ing it from time to time but still .. > > >> **** >> >> ** ** >> >> == Rene**** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* spameden [mailto:[email protected]] >> *Sent:* donderdag 18 juli 2013 17:57 >> >> *To:* Rene Kluwen >> *Cc:* Alejandro Guerrieri; kannel_dev_mailinglist [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: Multi record sending patch**** >> >> ** ** >> >> I will wait for your revised patch! >> >> currently I'm using Alejandro's patch but on outdated r4968 kannel/sqlbox. >> **** >> >> ** ** >> >> 2013/7/18 Rene Kluwen <[email protected]>**** >> >> I could come up with a re-patch. Where the sqlbox_id’s are returned in a >> separate list.**** >> >> This way, performance can even be boosted by using only 1 delete >> statement: DELETE FROM <send_sms_table> WHERE sqlbox_id in (id1, id2, id3, >> etc….)**** >> >> **** >> >> What do you think?**** >> >> **** >> >> == Rene**** >> >> **** >> >> *From:* spameden [mailto:[email protected]] >> *Sent:* donderdag 18 juli 2013 17:24 >> *To:* Rene Kluwen >> *Cc:* Alejandro Guerrieri; kannel_dev_mailinglist [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: Multi record sending patch**** >> >> **** >> >> +1 for this patch to be included!**** >> >> the only thing is sqlbox deletes record from the database before its sent >> to the bearerbox, so if sqlbox crashes at this point some messages could be >> lost.**** >> >> **** >> >> 2013/7/18 Rene Kluwen <[email protected]>**** >> >> Hello Alejandro,**** >> >> **** >> >> I found this patch and I consider it useful enough to include in sqlbox >> trunk.**** >> >> Is this the latest version? And is it tested well?**** >> >> **** >> >> Maybe you have a diff against current trunk.**** >> >> **** >> >> == Rene**** >> >> **** >> >> **** >> >> ** ** >> > >
