>>> Timo,
>>> Any hints on how many POP3 and IMAP connections I'd be able to get
>>> away with in a single threads with the above setup, assuming they're
>>> relative busy?
>
> The problem is that if there is any waiting for locks, all the other
> connections hang there as well waiting for it. Sam
On 15.11.2010, at 22.58, Mark Moseley wrote:
>> Timo,
>> Any hints on how many POP3 and IMAP connections I'd be able to get
>> away with in a single threads with the above setup, assuming they're
>> relative busy?
The problem is that if there is any waiting for locks, all the other
connections h
> Timo,
> Any hints on how many POP3 and IMAP connections I'd be able to get
> away with in a single threads with the above setup, assuming they're
> relative busy? I.e. if my boxes typically have, say, 200 concurrent
> POP3 connections and 600 IMAP connections, if I used
> process_min_avail=50 for
>> Only potential problem is memory leaks that keep increasing the memory
>> usage. Of course there should be no memory leaks. :) You could anyway set
>> something like service_count=1000 to get it to restart after handling 1000
>> connections.
>
> I'll keep that one in mind. Doesn't seem like i
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 9.11.2010, at 23.49, Mark Moseley wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>>> On 9.11.2010, at 22.14, Mark Moseley wrote:
>>>
service imap {
service_count = 0
}
>> Would the risks involved be id
On 9.11.2010, at 23.49, Mark Moseley wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
>> On 9.11.2010, at 22.14, Mark Moseley wrote:
>>
>>> service imap {
>>> service_count = 0
>>> }
>>>
> Would the risks involved be identical to your warnings about using
> "service_count=0" with p
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 9.11.2010, at 22.14, Mark Moseley wrote:
>
>> service imap {
>> service_count = 0
>> }
>>
>> Is that safe to do in imap and/or pop3? Or at least no more insecure
>> than using service_count=0 for imap-login and pop3-login?
>
> Yep.
>
Would
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 10.11.2010 00:05, Timo Sirainen a écrit :
> On 9.11.2010, at 22.14, Mark Moseley wrote:
>
>> service imap {
>> service_count = 0
>> }
>>
>> Is that safe to do in imap and/or pop3? Or at least no more insecure
>> than using service_count=0 for imap-
On 9.11.2010, at 22.14, Mark Moseley wrote:
> service imap {
> service_count = 0
> }
>
> Is that safe to do in imap and/or pop3? Or at least no more insecure
> than using service_count=0 for imap-login and pop3-login?
Yep.
This is copy-pasted from Timo's comment in the "Todays Performance
Data for 2.0.x" thread, but I didn't want to hijack that thread. In
it, Timo says:
service imap {
service_count = 0
}
(i.e. reuse imap processes) reduced the system CPU usage to almost
nothing. But if you use different UIDs for
10 matches
Mail list logo
