- Treo 755p continuously reboots when plugged into USB
- My first facebook phisher
- Calumet Photo coupon code
- Coupon for $5 off gun stuff
- How to Disable Credit Card RFID
- Performance Bicycle Coupon code
- Fear == money
- Amazon offers Reserved Instances
- Katadyn Guide Filter replacement leaking coal
- RebuildStarted event detected on md device /dev/md0
Performance increase with Amazon's EBS (persistent storage)

At familylink.com, we have 4 MySQL database systems on EC2 that run that our facebook app, various other social network apps and various websites. I recently switched our disk storage for those instances from the standard EC2 instance disks to EBS (Amazon's persistent storage for EC2) and wanted to share some brief numbers with you regarding performance.
I'm using a simple (yet quite complex) metric to measure the performance increase, load. System load is a number that show how many processes are contending for system resources (usually CPU.) For a more detailed description of load, read this article.
Enough of the talk, here's what I saw when I switched the 4 databases over to EBS:
---Database server #1---
Purpose: 2 moderately used databases
Disk change: 2 striped local disks (raid0) to single EBS volume
Peak Load change: 2.5 to 1
Estimated disk performance increase: 5x
---Database server #2---
Purpose: 2 lightly used databases
Disk change: 2 striped local disks (raid0) to single EBS volume
Peak Load change: 1.5 to 0.5
Estimated disk performance increase: 6x
---Database server #3---
Purpose: 9 lightly used databases
Disk change: 2 striped local disks (raid0) to single EBS volume
Peak Load change: 1 to 1 (no noticeable change)
Estimated disk performance increase: 2x
---Database server #4---
Purpose: 1 heavily used database
Disk change: 4 striped local disks (raid0) to 4 striped EBS volumes (raid0)
Peak Load change: 3 to 1.5
Estimated disk performance increase: 2x
Keep in mind that in theory 2 striped disks are almost twice as fast as a single disk. That's why I say there's a disk performance increase of 2x on database server #3 even though there was no noticeable performance increase (we went from using 2 disks to 1 disk.)
There you go, real-world numbers from real-world sites and servers. In summary, it's safe to say you'll see a significant disk performance increase if you switch over to using EBS with your EC2 instances. In addition to the performance increase, it's a no-brainer that you want persistent storage for your databases. One other huge benefit is snapshots. You can quickly and easily snapshot your database for backup purposes or for testing/reporting you may want to run against your most recent production data. See Amazon's site for more details.
If you haven't yet tested EBS with your systems on EC2, now is the time.

Great post!
Great post! Nice to see that you like EBS!
Simone (AWS Evangelist)
http://twitter.com/simone_brunozzi
Performance
How does the new setup stack up versus a server with on board storage?
Seems like a bad idea to run a database servers using NAS.
Quick comparison
I just ran a quick comparison to a few machines with 'hdparm -t <device name>', which tests the read speed from disk.
(these machines are under some load, so these results aren't perfect)
server A
2 SATA disks, 7200RPM, software raid 1
40.66 MB/sec
server B
4 scsi disks, 7200RPM, hardware raid 10
49.28 MB/sec
server C
single EBS volume on an xlarge EC2 instance
78.52 MB/sec
As far as running these databases on a NAS (which I think is a fair comparison for EBS); if I get better performance and reliability, I really can't complain. I'm not sure of their network topology, but have noticed that EBS performance fluctuates from minute to minute (probably due to network traffic.) Even in the low points of the fluctuations, the performance is still pretty good.
Thanks!
altj, thanks for these numbers. It helps me to see real-life examples. I'm curious though how much your price went up. I know that there are EBS charges not only for the storage space, but also for the IO requests per second.
Post new comment