On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 12:00:08PM -0800, Ori Bani wrote:
> > Otherwise, you're trying to solve some problem that's motivating
> > this question, so state that instead.
>
> No, no problem. Only attempting to future-proof things. I anticipate
> mail volume to grow in the future, and as I have access to SSD, I
> thought maybe postfix would run faster using it under its queues. Is
> this not the case?
Generally, there is no performance advantage, unless the disk is
a significant bottleneck for your workload. If you're receiving
mail, generally the bottleneck is content inspection.
If you're sending mail at under 100 msgs/sec, or virus-scanning
outbound mail, a modern server with a RAID controller with a BBU,
will be plenty fast. If you to get well north of ~300 msgs/sec,
then perhaps you need a faster disk, or more machines, whichever
is more cost effective.
For a sufficiently expensive SSD, another server may be a better
option, though cost of cooling, power and data-center space also
comes into the equation.
--
Viktor.
