How to use tcpdump on "Very" Busy Hosts

April 18, 2011
Author
Devananda van der Veen
Share this Post:

Tcpdump Packet Loss on Busy Servers

Often I run into problems when trying to use mk-query-digest with tcpdump on “very” busy hosts. You might be thinking, “very busy is a relative and unquantifiable term,” and you’d be right, so I’ll phrase this differently. Let me give a little background to the problem first. Mk-query-digest tries to handle dropped or missing packets gracefully, but even so they can skew results dramatically. Imagine a situation where a single connection sends two queries and gets two responses, with a response time of R for each request, and a wait time of W between the requests. If the first response and second request are dropped by the kernel, the result – from mk-query-digest’s perspective – is that the database took 2R + W time to respond to the first request.

 Possible Solutions to Using tcpdump on Busy Servers

Back to the question of, “what is a very busy host?” In my experience, if you are getting even 5% of tcpdump packets dropped by the kernel, the results can be skewed enough to cause confusion about which queries are really slow. Recently, I got more than 60% dropped packets on a server with roughly 50MB/s of traffic on port 3306, system load of about 10, and 8 CPU cores. The resulting mk-query-digest output was obviously bogus when compared to the host’s slow-query-log (for example, none of the top 5 slow queries reported by mkqd appeared in the actual slow log file). After a little brain-storming, we came up with a few solutions:

  1. use “mk-query-digest –filter ‘$event->{time} && $event->{time} > 1′” to exclude all queries which it believes took longer than the servers long-query-time of 1 second
  2. tcpdump traffic only from a small and representative subset of clients
  3. tcpdump a modulo of incoming ports (including port 3306, because we must capture the responses from mysqld)

#1 has an obvious flaw — if your long-query-time is 1 second, and mkqd believes that a query which actually took 10ms instead took 0.9s, the results are still useless. That is to say, this doesn’t actually solve the real problem of dropped packets, it just applies a mask to the output. #2 seems like the simplest good solution, but when I tested this, I still got very high percentage of dropped packets (around 30% when filtering only 4 out of hundreds of active clients). While this is lower than without the filter, it is still unusable. #3 actually worked very well and resulted in about 0.2% packet loss on this host, which is acceptable — the variances are statistically smoothed out and don’t noticeably affect the results. Here is the tcpdump command used.

I also had to forward the tcpdump output to another host for processing because the database host couldn’t handle the additional IO or CPU pressure of either writing it to a file or piping it to mk-query-digest. Here is a draft of a script to automate this; use at your own risk and update to suit your needs.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Far
Enough.

Said no pioneer ever.
MySQL, PostgreSQL, InnoDB, MariaDB, MongoDB and Kubernetes are trademarks for their respective owners.
© 2026 Percona All Rights Reserved