[drupal-devel] Looking for a Drupal 4.5.2 database
We're looking for representative Drupal 4.5.2 databases that we can use for benchmarking purpose. We favor (a) largish databases (b) that continue to work in absence of contributed/custom modules. We'll upgrade one or more databases to Drupal 4.6/HEAD to compare performance of Drupal 4.5 with Drupal 4.6/HEAD. If you want to help, or if you have a database to share, let us know within the next few hours. (We only have access to these benchmark machines for a few days.) Any recommendations for benchmark tools (that run on Linux) are much appreciated as well. -- Dries Buytaert :: http://www.buytaert.net/
We're looking for representative Drupal 4.5.2 databases that we can use for benchmarking purpose. We favor (a) largish databases (b) that continue to work in absence of contributed/custom modules.
I've a largish database at Gamegrene.com, but requires flexinode installed for it to "really" work (node, however, is properly filled along with about 8,000 comments, so it should still be workable without). Full SQL exports are dumped weekly, and are available at a secret URL (mail me privately) upon request. I'll provide the SQL export, but NOT a machine - I don't have time to debug any issues caused by the upgrade. I'd also be heartily interested in the results, of course ;) -- Morbus Iff ( you are nothing without your robot car, NOTHING! ) Culture: http://www.disobey.com/ and http://www.gamegrene.com/ Spidering Hacks: http://amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596005776/disobeycom icq: 2927491 / aim: akaMorbus / yahoo: morbus_iff / jabber.org: morbus
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Morbus Iff wrote:
We're looking for representative Drupal 4.5.2 databases that we can use for benchmarking purpose. We favor (a) largish databases (b) that continue to work in absence of contributed/custom modules.
I've a largish database at Gamegrene.com, but requires flexinode installed for it to "really" work (node, however, is properly filled along with about 8,000 comments, so it should still be workable without). Full SQL exports are dumped weekly, and are available at a secret URL (mail me privately) upon request.
Has been gratefully received and already received a severe beating due to redLED and myself. We found that we will need to take the throttle into account when doing such stuff, because after too many requests /forum simply switched itself off.
I'll provide the SQL export, but NOT a machine - I don't have time to debug any issues caused by the upgrade. I'd also be heartily interested in the results, of course ;)
Yeah, getting a free test upgrade is certainly part of the deal. I'll try your's later. Cheers, Gerhard
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Gerhard Killesreiter wrote:
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Morbus Iff wrote:
I've a largish database at Gamegrene.com, but requires flexinode installed for it to "really" work (node, however, is properly filled along with about 8,000 comments, so it should still be workable without). Full SQL exports are dumped weekly, and are available at a secret URL (mail me privately) upon request.
Has been gratefully received and already received a severe beating due to redLED and myself.
We found that we will need to take the throttle into account when doing such stuff, because after too many requests /forum simply switched itself off.
I'll provide the SQL export, but NOT a machine - I don't have time to debug any issues caused by the upgrade. I'd also be heartily interested in the results, of course ;)
Yeah, getting a free test upgrade is certainly part of the deal.
I'll try your's later.
The upgrade went just fine. I compared a node page with a huge amount of comments and the /forum page. Both versions have about the same speed. There weren't many significant database changes. I will try the search next as this is the only thing I recall being reworked. If somebody has suggestions for urls that should be tested, let me know. Cheers, Gerhard
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Gerhard Killesreiter wrote:
The upgrade went just fine. I compared a node page with a huge amount of comments and the /forum page. Both versions have about the same speed. There weren't many significant database changes. I will try the search next as this is the only thing I recall being reworked.
The search page is quite a bit faster for cvs if you use a search term with a lot of results. Most of it is probably due to the fact that you only get a paged page in cvs and all of them in 4.5. If is a x3 decrease in connection time. Numbers (averaged over 1000 page request, concurrency 1): 626 ms +- 5.6 for 4.5 220 ms +- 4.8 for cvs If one has a less popular search term, 4.5 is a bit faster: 147 ms +- 1.5 for 4.5 155 ms +- 1.7 for cvs But the results are much better. :) Cheers, Gerhard
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Gerhard Killesreiter wrote:
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Gerhard Killesreiter wrote:
The upgrade went just fine. I compared a node page with a huge amount of comments and the /forum page. Both versions have about the same speed. There weren't many significant database changes. I will try the search next as this is the only thing I recall being reworked.
After playing with Morbus' database I started to play with the one Charlie sent us. His db has over 3000 nodes, while Morbus has about 400. I've upgraded a copy to CVS. I then requested the front page with 100 times using apache bench -n 10 -c 5 (10 times five users). No caching was used. On the benchmarked machine I collected all sorts of data. 165 data columns in total... You can get the raw data files, if you want. I will also produce graphs from selected columns on request. The good news is that Drupal CVS did have a slightly lower maximal load. I did not look at the other data columns yet. On none of the runs were any real failures, but oddly the page size differed occassionally by a few bytes for both versions. Cheers, Gerhard
participants (3)
-
Dries Buytaert -
Gerhard Killesreiter -
Morbus Iff