What became of the append/truncate ideas for queuefiles?

2010-03-29 Thread Ralf Hildebrandt 
During my internal performance tests I noticed the fsstone program and
wondered what became of your ide to use append/truncate instead of
generating new queuefiles.

From http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2004-07/0991.html

Early measurements have shown that disk overhead
can be reduced dramatically by using append/truncate instead of
create/rename/delete.

-- 
Ralf Hildebrandt
  Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
  Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
  Campus Benjamin Franklin
  Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin
  Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962
  ralf.hildebra...@charite.de | http://www.charite.de

Re: What became of the append/truncate ideas for queuefiles?

2010-03-29 Thread Wietse Venema 
Ralf Hildebrandt:
 During my internal performance tests I noticed the fsstone program and
 wondered what became of your ide to use append/truncate instead of
 generating new queuefiles.
 
 From http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2004-07/0991.html
 
 Early measurements have shown that disk overhead
 can be reduced dramatically by using append/truncate instead of
 create/rename/delete.

Early stress tests also demonstrated that Postfix was up to 3 times
faster than qmail when relaying small SMTP messages.

I'll put the scarce time into finishing postscreen, and worry about
queue performance later.

Wietse