Hi,
we had some performance issues on our ldap servers running Solaris 10 sparc.
I did some tests using slamd http://www.slamd.com/ and got disturbing results:
ldap-service: OpenLDAP 2.4.23, setup identical on both boxes, threads=64,
identical content.
box1:
hardware: Sun Microsystems sun4v
Am Mon, 21 Feb 2011 16:09:44 -0600
schrieb Mauro Parra maur...@gmail.com:
Hello,
is there any document besides the Kumar's article about the openLDAP
proxy cache? Specially a howto about configuring the service.
man slapo-pcache(5), and there should one or two old contributions in
SuSE SDB.
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 05:07:27PM +0100, Germ van Ek wrote:
Note: the use of referrals to construct a Distributed Directory Service
is extremely clumsy and not well supported by common clients. If an
Very true...
existing installation has already been built using referrals, the use of
the
Andrew,
Thank your for replying to my question.
You can equip them with caches if you want to, or just set them up to
pass the queries through to the appropriate backend server.
Where a non-caching proxy is the same as a chain overlay?
In the LDAP proxy solution you suggested, could I then
--On Thursday, February 24, 2011 10:13 PM +0100 Thierry Lacoste
laco...@u-pec.fr wrote:
On 16 févr. 11, at 23:38, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Wednesday, February 16, 2011 3:20 PM -0700 l...@mm.st wrote:
We currently do not use ncsd on the clients, but are considering it
if
that makes
Hi,
I totally agree with you about Solaris + OpenLdap issues. Just use
Linux if you will use openldap if possible of course ..
Regards.
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Quanah Gibson-Mount qua...@zimbra.com wrote:
--On Thursday, February 24, 2011 3:53 PM +0100 juergen.spren...@swisscom.com
Hi all,
on the same line of previous mail about openldap performances on Solaris, I
would like to know if someone has experience about AIX.
I'm evaluating a deploy on this platform and I would like to know about any
performance comparison/experience between AIX (5.3/6.1/7.1) and Linux.
Thanks in
quote Quanah
Some time ago, I did benchmarks of Linux 2.6 vs Slowaris-x86 on identical
hardware, and it still was noticeably slower, although not as bad as when
using the sparc architecture.
quote Quanah /
Could you state what Solaris-x86 version that was?
Thanks, Kuba
- Original
--On Thursday, February 24, 2011 11:34 PM + je...@gmx.co.uk wrote:
quote Quanah
Some time ago, I did benchmarks of Linux 2.6 vs Slowaris-x86 on identical
hardware, and it still was noticeably slower, although not as bad as when
using the sparc architecture.
quote Quanah /
Could you
Keep in mind that gcc on slowaris is 32 bit, and not very well optimised by
default. Linux on a 64 bit linux platform usually compiles as 64 bit, slowaris
by default will be 32 bit if you use the onboard gcc compiler.
Using the compiler from sun studio (since v11 now free) helps quite alot but
--On Friday, February 25, 2011 10:02 AM +1000 Brett Maxfield
brett.maxfi...@gmail.com wrote:
Keep in mind that gcc on slowaris is 32 bit, and not very well optimised
by default. Linux on a 64 bit linux platform usually compiles as 64 bit,
slowaris by default will be 32 bit if you use the
Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
--On Thursday, February 24, 2011 3:53 PM +0100
juergen.spren...@swisscom.com wrote:
Hi,
we had some performance issues on our ldap servers running Solaris 10
sparc.
I did some tests using slamd http://www.slamd.com/ and got disturbing
results:
ldap-service:
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Howard Chu h...@symas.com wrote:
I will note that if you are going to use slowaris, I highly advise you set
a memory key rather than using on disk cache for BDB if your DB is any
size
over about 4 GB. Other than that, you'll generally just have to deal with
Brett @Google wrote:
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Howard Chu h...@symas.com
mailto:h...@symas.com wrote:
I will note that if you are going to use slowaris, I highly advise you
set
a memory key rather than using on disk cache for BDB if your DB is any
size
Sorry, but I do not agree.
What I can do is some tests with my relative little user database with my
specific configuration.
I surely cannot encounter any problem that a more complex (or simply
different) configuration would be able to.
If I need to introduce a new software in my production
15 matches
Mail list logo
