Hi,
Does anyone have experience with bending the NFS recommendations to get
better performance?
The question is has anyone, with Maildir and the INDEX= on NFS (i.e.
dovecot.index and dovecot.index.cache, set mail_nfs_index to no. If so,
was it better to turn maildir_copy_preserve_filename
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 10:58 -0700, Jack Stewart wrote:
The question is has anyone, with Maildir and the INDEX= on NFS (i.e.
dovecot.index and dovecot.index.cache, set mail_nfs_index to no.
How much worse is the mail_nfs_index=yes? Last I heard it made hardly a
difference.
If so,
was it
Timo Sirainen wrote:
I figure that the worst that can happen is that the dovecot.index.cache
file will become corrupt, and dovecot will then rebuild it.
It's not the worst that can happen, but index file errors are probably
more likely than other errors..
I concur! I currently
The performance hit was bad. When I tried mail_nfs_index = yes the
load went from 0.5 to 120+ (on each of three servers).
My RPM of 1.1.3 includes the Redhat patches from their source RPM for
1.0.7. I'm checking the patches now and most seem benign but there is
some mbox locking changes.
On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 12:20 -0700, Jack Stewart wrote:
The performance hit was bad. When I tried mail_nfs_index = yes the
load went from 0.5 to 120+ (on each of three servers).
It shouldn't have been anything that bad. I could send you some patches
that reduce what mail_nfs_index=yes does. It
Thanks. I would like to give the patches a try.
I've removed all of the redhat patches except for the one that tells
dovecot where to find the certs (why does redhat use pki? why?) but I
haven't installed this version yet. Are there any build/configure
twiddles that might help?
Just as an
