[Rt-devel] RT Speed

[Michael.ki]

We've got probably the opposite issue - few users (<200 I believe) but
years of ticket data.  People here keep thinking that this is the
primary speed issue, and did a ticket archive last October.  It didn't
really help much (maybe 5-10% speed improvement) and we're now back to
where we were 6 months ago anyway.  The database itself is fast -
blindingly so, imo.  From what I can read nearly all the queries are
cached in memory anyway, so I don't think I can hold mysql accountable
for much of this.  I just ran a dprof and got some interesting numbers.
The page took 90 seconds to come up - 58 seconds of that was
'user+system' time (I guess the rest was ambient and/or the dprof
overhead) - the DBIx::SearchBuilder stuff was close to 60% of the
execution time (~35 seconds).  

Has anyone on the list stayed with mysql from 2->3 and noticed a speed
improvement?

Thanks!

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Sullivan [mailto:ajs at crankycanuck.ca] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 2:28 PM
To: Michael.ki
Cc: Andrew Sullivan; rt-devel at lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: Re: [Rt-devel] RT Speed

On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 02:11:47PM -0500, Michael.ki wrote:
> So you're saying that moving from RT2 to RT3 and MySQL to PG gave you 
> performance hit?

Yes, quite a significant one.  Part of the issue, though, is that the
not-MySQL support in RT is sort of an add-on.  It works, but this is
fundamentally an application that was ported from MySQL to other
systems.  MySQL isn't a very database-y database, and it shows when
you're trying to get other systems to work with applications designed
for MySQL.  The developers have done a reasonable job, given that
constraint.

> What have you done to get improvements?  Only indexes?  Something
else?

Well, you _really_ need to make your database system go fast. 
There's a lot of interaction between the interface and the database, and
not all of it is terribly efficient.  If you can live with MySQL, then I
strongly suggest you stick with it.  Our problem partly came from a long
user list, which made several kinds of searches really awful.  But many
standard kinds of use are just fine.  I will say that the feature set
compared to 2.x is _way better_; better, in fact, than most systems I've
seen.



A


--
Andrew Sullivan  | ajs at crankycanuck.ca
In the future this spectacle of the middle classes shocking the avant-
garde will probably become the textbook definition of Postmodernism. 
                --Brad Holland