On Sat, 25 Mar 2000, Adam McKenna wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 25, 2000 at 11:36:44PM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I agree. I manage a similar system (quad Xeon, 1GB memory) with a
> > loadaverage of 0.3 or thereabouts.
>
> In other words, your quad Xeon is being wasted. You could replace it with a
> single Pentium II or Pentium III machine.
Depends on what you mean by wasted. Nobody's worried about the mail
system being overloaded (bandwidth now becoming the limiting
factor). It keeps The Man off my back. IMHO, a small price to pay.
Of course, yes, it could be handled by a PII for now, but I'd still
rather have the quad Xeon with the redundant hardware goodies (and a
service contract) than an off-the-shelf PII, or even one built by my
own hands.
> > Although I'm not familiar with the intricacies of how load is
> > distributed across multiple CPUs among different OS's, I would suspect
> > something is wrong with your system.
>
> That is an absolutely terrible thing to say. You don't know anything about
> his system
Granted, I'm not a sysadmin by profession, and I've only been using
qmail for ~4 months, but I've been running a similar system (aside
from the ReiserFS) under a similar load. From my limited experience,
and our record of loadaverages over the past 3.5 weeks, a load average
of 1.4 would indicate something out of the ordinary.
> (and obviously, not enough about Unix or computers in general) to
> make an accurate analysis based on his post. Please refrain from saying such
> things in the future unless you're sure you know what you're talking about.
Brian
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.baquiran.com
AIM: bbaquiran
