From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Todd Lyons Subject: Re: non volatile ram devices Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:09:09 -0800 Message-ID: <20021207040909.GJ9512@mrball.net> References: <200212042059.35300.russell@coker.com.au> <200212051000.32340.russell@coker.com.au> <1039094639.8199.119.camel@tiny> <200212061052.59139.russell@coker.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; x-action="pgp-signed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: reiserfs-list@namesys.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Matthias Andree wanted us to know: >> I'm using a fairly vanilla kernel. It's performance is 2 messages per second >> taken from qmail spool and delivered while there is a background load of pop >> access and new incoming mail. IE if there is a backlog of mail to deliver >> the backlog gets smaller by 120 messages per minute. >In my benchmarks on a plain FreeBSD ffs and a Micropolis 4345WS UWSCSI >disk drive (7200/min) that was otherwise idle, qmail maxes out for >remote 1-to-1 deliveries at a good 3 deliveries/s. It might improve a You need to increase your remoteconcurrency limit. Unless your emails are 10's of Megabytes each, 3/s is way low. - -- Blue skies... Todd | Get a bigger hammer! | All vendors suck, but different ones | | http://www.mrball.net | suck less in different applications. | | http://faq.mrball.net | --Andy Walden on NANOG | Linux kernel 2.4.19-16mdk 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE98XRlIBT1264ScBURAltmAJsED+JgbSx0CKWb1PIf5iopOXXLBQCeKebg 3LeZt00jkHlER19Mqt/bBCU= =RldY -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----