- Previous message: Jerome Nenert: "single instance store and replication"
- Maybe in reply to: (no name): "Re: Slow lmtpd"
- Next in thread: Andre Nathan: "Re: Slow lmtpd"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
|
|
|
From: Andre Nathan (no email)
Date: Thu Mar 01 2007 - 07:09:39 EST
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 09:25 +0100, wrote:
> A few thousand lmtpd would be *way* too much because they all use the
> same I/O bottleneck (if you don't have partitions on different I/O
> paths). For a single I/O path i would recommend not more than some 10
> .. 20 concurrent lmtpd with the exception if you are having complex
> sieve rules which adds to latency.
Huh, sorry... read hundreds where I wrote thousands... during peak times
there 200-250 lmtpd processes. Anyway, it's still too much.
The partitions are mounted remotely using ATA over Ethernet, with jumbo
frames enabled. It's an 8-disk RAID-5 array. I'm not sure if the network
can be the bottleneck. The snmp statistics don't show full utilization
of the gigabit link.
I can lower the maximum number of lmtpd processes, but the problem is
that given the number of connections made to lmtpd from the MTAs, it'll
quickly reach that number and start bouncing messages.
Thanks,
Andre
---- Cyrus Home Page: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/ Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
|
|
|