Performance Testing: Self-built Databases vs. ApsaraDB for RDS

简介: Poorly configured ApsaraDB instances may appear to underperform compared with self-built databases.

DataWarehouse_FriendlyDatabaseDesign

Abstract: Poorly configured ApsaraDB instances may appear to underperform compared with self-built databases. This article discusses how to troubleshoot this problem in your databases.

Recent comparisons of self-built databases with RDS show that self-built databases tend to have higher query speeds than those seen on RDS instances. Take a logistics company for example. At the very beginning, the ApsaraDB for RDS SQL server database accesses the RDS instance via ECS and executes a statement which takes about 60s, however the RDS SQL server database accesses the local self-built databases on the ECS in only 2-3s. So, is ApsaraDB RDS really worse than self-built databases? Next, we will discuss the key points for comparing self-built databases with RDS and how to compare their performances fairly.

The following factors should be taken into account when comparing the statement execution performance between self-built databases and RDS:

1. Zones and Network Connections

Please refer to Performance testing: note-worthy observations in self-built databases v.s. RDS (article in Chinese) for a deep analysis of zones and network connections. If network factors need to be verified, a profiler can be enabled in RDS, a network packet captured in the client, and the execution termination time in the RDS compared with the resulting return time in the network packet. A bigger time difference indicates slower network transmission speeds.

For an RDS SQL Server 2012 instance, the SQL Server Profiler can be enabled to capture events such as RPC:Completed, SQL:StmtStarting, SQL:StmtCompleted, SQL:BatchStarting, and SQL:BatchCompleted.

The SQL Server Profiler cannot currently be enabled for RDS SQL Server 2008 R2 instances, however the following statement can query the start_time and total_elapsed_time for recently executed statements. total_elapased_time represents the total time required to execute the statement after it reaches the SQL Server (the unit is ms).

2. Instance Parameter Configuration

A large variety of parameters need to be taken into account for a MySQL instance. Please refer to Performance testing: note-worthy observations in self-built databases v.s. RDS (article in Chinese) for detailed analysis and descriptions.
The main parameters that need to be taken into account include fill factor (%), max degree of parallelism, and max server memory (MB).
• Fill Factor (%): A server-side parameter for optimizing data storage and performance. When an index is created or re-created, this value is used to determine the percentage of data space to be filled on each leaf page to reserve room for expanding the index.
• Max Degree of Parallelism (MaxDOP): Limits the number of processors used when a parallel plan is executed, i.e., limiting the degree of parallelism (DOP) of a statement.
• Max Server Memory (MB): Sets an upper limit for memory obtained by a buffer pool.

3. Resource Waiting or Blocking

Comparisons must be made between the two environments to determine if waiting and blocking is occurring during execution of the statement. View information on waiting:

WITH [Waits] AS
    (SELECT
        [wait_type],
        [wait_time_ms] / 1000.0 AS [WaitS],
        ([wait_time_ms] - [signal_wait_time_ms]) / 1000.0 AS [ResourceS],
        [signal_wait_time_ms] / 1000.0 AS [SignalS],
        [waiting_tasks_count] AS [WaitCount],
       100.0 * [wait_time_ms] / SUM ([wait_time_ms]) OVER() AS [Percentage],
        ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY [wait_time_ms] DESC) AS [RowNum]
    FROM sys.dm_os_wait_stats
    WHERE [wait_type] NOT IN (
        N'BROKER_EVENTHANDLER', N'BROKER_RECEIVE_WAITFOR',
        N'BROKER_TASK_STOP', N'BROKER_TO_FLUSH',
        N'BROKER_TRANSMITTER', N'CHECKPOINT_QUEUE',
        N'CHKPT', N'CLR_AUTO_EVENT',
        N'CLR_MANUAL_EVENT', N'CLR_SEMAPHORE',
  -- Maybe uncomment these four if you have mirroring issues
        N'DBMIRROR_DBM_EVENT', N'DBMIRROR_EVENTS_QUEUE',
        N'DBMIRROR_WORKER_QUEUE', N'DBMIRRORING_CMD',
 
        N'DIRTY_PAGE_POLL', N'DISPATCHER_QUEUE_SEMAPHORE',
        N'EXECSYNC', N'FSAGENT',
        N'FT_IFTS_SCHEDULER_IDLE_WAIT', N'FT_IFTSHC_MUTEX',
 
        -- Maybe uncomment these six if you have AG issues
        N'HADR_CLUSAPI_CALL', N'HADR_FILESTREAM_IOMGR_IOCOMPLETION',
        N'HADR_LOGCAPTURE_WAIT', N'HADR_NOTIFICATION_DEQUEUE',
        N'HADR_TIMER_TASK', N'HADR_WORK_QUEUE',
 
  N'KSOURCE_WAKEUP', N'LAZYWRITER_SLEEP',
        N'LOGMGR_QUEUE', N'MEMORY_ALLOCATION_EXT',
        N'ONDEMAND_TASK_QUEUE',
        N'PREEMPTIVE_XE_GETTARGETSTATE',
        N'PWAIT_ALL_COMPONENTS_INITIALIZED',
        N'PWAIT_DIRECTLOGCONSUMER_GETNEXT',
        N'QDS_PERSIST_TASK_MAIN_LOOP_SLEEP', N'QDS_ASYNC_QUEUE',
        N'QDS_CLEANUP_STALE_QUERIES_TASK_MAIN_LOOP_SLEEP',
        N'QDS_SHUTDOWN_QUEUE', N'REDO_THREAD_PENDING_WORK',
        N'REQUEST_FOR_DEADLOCK_SEARCH', N'RESOURCE_QUEUE',
        N'SERVER_IDLE_CHECK', N'SLEEP_BPOOL_FLUSH',
        N'SLEEP_DBSTARTUP', N'SLEEP_DCOMSTARTUP',
        N'SLEEP_MASTERDBREADY', N'SLEEP_MASTERMDREADY',
        N'SLEEP_MASTERUPGRADED', N'SLEEP_MSDBSTARTUP',
        N'SLEEP_SYSTEMTASK', N'SLEEP_TASK',
        N'SLEEP_TEMPDBSTARTUP', N'SNI_HTTP_ACCEPT',
        N'SP_SERVER_DIAGNOSTICS_SLEEP', N'SQLTRACE_BUFFER_FLUSH',
        N'SQLTRACE_INCREMENTAL_FLUSH_SLEEP',
  N'SQLTRACE_WAIT_ENTRIES', N'WAIT_FOR_RESULTS',
        N'WAITFOR', N'WAITFOR_TASKSHUTDOWN',
        N'WAIT_XTP_RECOVERY',
        N'WAIT_XTP_HOST_WAIT', N'WAIT_XTP_OFFLINE_CKPT_NEW_LOG',
        N'WAIT_XTP_CKPT_CLOSE', N'XE_DISPATCHER_JOIN',
        N'XE_DISPATCHER_WAIT', N'XE_TIMER_EVENT')
    AND [waiting_tasks_count] > 0
    )
SELECT
   MAX ([W1].[wait_type]) AS [WaitType],
    CAST (MAX ([W1].[WaitS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Wait_S],
    CAST (MAX ([W1].[ResourceS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Resource_S],
    CAST (MAX ([W1].[SignalS]) AS DECIMAL (16,2)) AS [Signal_S],
    MAX ([W1].[WaitCount]) AS [WaitCount],
    CAST (MAX ([W1].[Percentage]) AS DECIMAL (5,2)) AS [Percentage],
    CAST ((MAX ([W1].[WaitS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgWait_S],
    CAST ((MAX ([W1].[ResourceS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgRes_S],
    CAST ((MAX ([W1].[SignalS]) / MAX ([W1].[WaitCount])) AS DECIMAL (16,4)) AS [AvgSig_S],
    CAST ('https://www.sqlskills.com/help/waits/' + MAX ([W1].[wait_type]) as XML) AS [Help/Info URL]
FROM [Waits] AS [W1]

INNER JOIN [Waits] AS [W2]
    ON [W2].[RowNum] <= [W1].[RowNum]
GROUP BY [W1].[RowNum]
HAVING SUM ([W2].[Percentage]) - MAX( [W1].[Percentage] ) < 95; -- percentage threshold
GO

Refer to Solutions to blocking of RDS for SQL Server (article in Chinese) for blocking.

4. Whether the index fragmentation rate and statistical information are consistent across the two environments

Follow the below guidelines when checking the index fragment rate of a statement:

SELECT dbschemas.[name] as 'Schema',
dbtables.[name] as 'Table',
dbindexes.[name] as 'Index',
indexstats.avg_fragmentation_in_percent,
indexstats.page_count
FROM sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats (DB_ID(), NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL) AS indexstats
INNER JOIN sys.tables dbtables on dbtables.[object_id] = indexstats.[object_id]
INNER JOIN sys.schemas dbschemas on dbtables.[schema_id] = dbschemas.[schema_id]
INNER JOIN sys.indexes AS dbindexes ON dbindexes.[object_id] = indexstats.[object_id]
AND indexstats.index_id = dbindexes.index_id
WHERE indexstats.database_id = DB_ID()
ORDER BY indexstats.avg_fragmentation_in_percent desc

A high index fragmentation rate can negatively affect query speed. If the index fragmentation rate is between 5% and 30%, it is recommended to restructure the index. If the index fragmentation rate is greater than 30%, the index should be rebuilt.

Refer to the following statement for checking statistical information:

SELECT t.name TableName, s.[name] StatName, 
STATS_DATE(t.object_id,s.[stats_id]) LastUpdated  
FROM sys.[stats] AS s JOIN sys.[tables] AS t ON 
[s].[object_id] = [t].[object_id] WHERE t.type = 'u'

If the statistical information in the RDS is older than that in the self-built database, it can then be updated manually, thereby preventing the SQL Server from generating incorrect and inefficient implementation plans based on obsolete statistical information.

5. High Availability Architecture

As a public relational database service, RDS must first be stable, highly available, secure, and capable of delivering secure and stable services for users. The second point is high performance.
RDS SQL Server uses High Safety synchronization to guarantee consistency between the master and slave data. This mode sacrifices some performance compared to High Performance mode, but availability is highly improved and data is thoroughly protected.
Meanwhile, RDS also provides multi-available zone master and slave instances. Dual nodes are located in different machine rooms, thereby further guaranteeing high availability and security.

Troubleshooting:

  1. The RDS instance has more memory than that of the local server.
  2. Network latency is low.
  3. The MAXDOP value of the RDS is 2, and the MAXDOP value for the self-built ECS instance is default, i.e., the parallel statement can be applied to manage as many parallel threads as possible.
    It can be seen from the implementation plan that the DOP for a query statement in RDS is 2, while the DOP for a query statement in the self-built database is 8, meaning that execution on RDS is slower than on the self-built database.

01

02

Solutions:

1.As can be seen above, the RDS configuration is actually higher than that of the self-built database, therefore the MaxDOP value in the parameter settings of the RDS instance can be increased to improve the DOP.
2.A user table is found by the implementation plan to be missing an index. After adding the missing index to RDS, the query performance is significantly improved. Even though the DOP is 2, execution can be completed in 5s.

相关实践学习
每个IT人都想学的“Web应用上云经典架构”实战
本实验从Web应用上云这个最基本的、最普遍的需求出发,帮助IT从业者们通过“阿里云Web应用上云解决方案”,了解一个企业级Web应用上云的常见架构,了解如何构建一个高可用、可扩展的企业级应用架构。
MySQL数据库入门学习
本课程通过最流行的开源数据库MySQL带你了解数据库的世界。   相关的阿里云产品:云数据库RDS MySQL 版 阿里云关系型数据库RDS(Relational Database Service)是一种稳定可靠、可弹性伸缩的在线数据库服务,提供容灾、备份、恢复、迁移等方面的全套解决方案,彻底解决数据库运维的烦恼。 了解产品详情: https://www.aliyun.com/product/rds/mysql 
目录
相关文章
|
AliSQL 关系型数据库 MySQL
Alibaba Cloud ApsaraDB for RDS – Winner of the 2018 MySQL Community Awards
Alibaba Cloud was awarded with the 2018 MySQL Community Award, Corporate Contributor category, at the Percona Live Open Source Database Conference.
1856 0
Alibaba Cloud ApsaraDB for RDS – Winner of the 2018 MySQL Community Awards
|
存储 关系型数据库 OLAP
阿里云ApsaraDB RDS用户 - OLAP最佳实践
背景 随着大数据分析型产品越来越丰富、细化,用户可能会看得眼花缭乱,如果对产品没有深度的理解,选错了岂不是劳民伤财? 本文将给大家分析一下RDS用户应该如何选择适合自己的大数据的分析产品,以及最佳实践方案。 用户环境分析 以最常用的服务举例,通常云用户会购买的产品如下 EC
7980 0
|
10月前
|
缓存 关系型数据库 BI
使用MYSQL Report分析数据库性能(下)
使用MYSQL Report分析数据库性能
599 158
|
10月前
|
关系型数据库 MySQL 数据库
自建数据库如何迁移至RDS MySQL实例
数据库迁移是一项复杂且耗时的工程,需考虑数据安全、完整性及业务中断影响。使用阿里云数据传输服务DTS,可快速、平滑完成迁移任务,将应用停机时间降至分钟级。您还可通过全量备份自建数据库并恢复至RDS MySQL实例,实现间接迁移上云。
|
10月前
|
关系型数据库 MySQL 数据库
阿里云数据库RDS费用价格:MySQL、SQL Server、PostgreSQL和MariaDB引擎收费标准
阿里云RDS数据库支持MySQL、SQL Server、PostgreSQL、MariaDB,多种引擎优惠上线!MySQL倚天版88元/年,SQL Server 2核4G仅299元/年,PostgreSQL 227元/年起。高可用、可弹性伸缩,安全稳定。详情见官网活动页。
1598 152
|
10月前
|
关系型数据库 MySQL 数据库
阿里云数据库RDS支持MySQL、SQL Server、PostgreSQL和MariaDB引擎
阿里云数据库RDS支持MySQL、SQL Server、PostgreSQL和MariaDB引擎,提供高性价比、稳定安全的云数据库服务,适用于多种行业与业务场景。
1107 156
|
10月前
|
缓存 监控 关系型数据库
使用MYSQL Report分析数据库性能(中)
使用MYSQL Report分析数据库性能
643 156
|
10月前
|
缓存 监控 关系型数据库
使用MYSQL Report分析数据库性能(上)
最终建议:当前系统是完美的读密集型负载模型,优化重点应放在减少行读取量和提高数据定位效率。通过索引优化、分区策略和内存缓存,预期可降低30%的CPU负载,同时保持100%的缓冲池命中率。建议每百万次查询后刷新统计信息以持续优化
761 161
|
11月前
|
存储 运维 关系型数据库
从MySQL到云数据库,数据库迁移真的有必要吗?
本文探讨了企业在业务增长背景下,是否应从 MySQL 迁移至云数据库的决策问题。分析了 MySQL 的优势与瓶颈,对比了云数据库在存储计算分离、自动化运维、多负载支持等方面的优势,并提出判断迁移必要性的五个关键问题及实施路径,帮助企业理性决策并落地迁移方案。
|
10月前
|
关系型数据库 MySQL 分布式数据库
阿里云PolarDB云原生数据库收费价格:MySQL和PostgreSQL详细介绍
阿里云PolarDB兼容MySQL、PostgreSQL及Oracle语法,支持集中式与分布式架构。标准版2核4G年费1116元起,企业版最高性能达4核16G,支持HTAP与多级高可用,广泛应用于金融、政务、互联网等领域,TCO成本降低50%。

推荐镜像

更多