On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 03:50:07PM +0200, Andreas Aardal Hanssen wrote:
> >> I'm using ReiserFS (which, BTW, is working very well). My
> >> mailsystem receives 70'000 mails a day and the throughput
> >> is just about twice that. Average mails sent per second
> >> varies around 70-170 mails.
> > Uh
>
> First, you complain about my where-did-you-get-that-from removing
> of Dan Bernstein's fsync()s, then you advise me to mount my
> queue-directory on a *ramdisk*
>
> That means, if the power dies and the UPS short-circuits, all
> the mail in the queue will be lost!
It was a turn of phrase
Andreas Aardal Hanssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Who said I removed fsync()s from Dan's code? Please read my
> closing and see if I've said that. You see, you're really
> taking words out of my mouth.
Just FYI, the correct expression is ``putting words into my mouth'',
and I didn't do that.
>> ...I also removed some unnessecary fsync()s as they were
>> slowing down everything very much...
> Be careful; if you mean that you've removed fsync()s from Dan's code,
> then you have definitely thrown away reliability in order to gain
> throughput. In your application, is i
Andreas Aardal Hanssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ...I also removed some unnessecary fsync()s as they were
> slowing down everything very much...
Be careful; if you mean that you've removed fsync()s from Dan's code,
then you have definitely thrown away reliability in order to gain
throughput.
>> I'm using ReiserFS (which, BTW, is working very well). My
>> mailsystem receives 70'000 mails a day and the throughput
>> is just about twice that. Average mails sent per second
>> varies around 70-170 mails.
> Uhm.. with 86400 seconds to a day, your average throughpout should be
> about 2mails
