-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 153
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
MySQL tuning and the max_allowed_packet default value #62
Comments
Definitely. Send us a pull request for a MySQL tuning section in the admin guide. I'm sure sean will have some things he can add too. We've never run this datastore at scale, so we've never had to do it. |
This is from sean on a users list thread, should be cleaned up and go in the documentation. GRR Configs: Mysql.conn_pool_min (default 5) - I try to set this to 10. This isn't as important, but it just keeps connections ready and makes GRR a little more responsive when load surges. The connector tries to prune the connection pool back down to this number when it isn't actively using lots of connections. This defaults to 5 because it doesn't make sense to default it to 10 when the max is 10. Worker.queue_shards (default 5) - There is probably some CS math that can be done here to find the optimal value, but I generally try to use a number at least equal to the number of frontends or workers. Having more queues helps distribute the load more evenly across the workers and helps database performance as the writes are spread across more rows. I would probably try to set this to 10-20. Greg might be able to chime in if there is any risk to setting it higher, but I don't think setting it slightly higher is going to cause any issues. MySQL Configs: |
I can understand if the GRR project doesn't want to start offering advice on tuning MySQL, but...
We've tried GRR with both SQLite and MySQL. Both work well, however when receiving large files, GRR will stall when using MySQL. This is due to a rather low default (16M) max_allowed_packet setting on Ubuntu. Should correcting this value be mentioned in the documentation?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: