From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id pBLHxaXK048142 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 11:59:36 -0600 Received: from smtp-tls.univ-nantes.fr (smtp-tls1.univ-nantes.fr [193.52.101.145]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id o5mbnqsurXXUkTu7 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 09:59:34 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4EF21DD2.3060004@univ-nantes.fr> Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 18:56:34 +0100 From: Yann Dupont MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Bad performance with XFS + 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 References: <20111211233929.GI14273@dastard> <20111212010053.GM14273@dastard> <4EF1A224.2070508@univ-nantes.fr> <4EF1F6DD.8020603@hardwarefreak.com> In-Reply-To: <4EF1F6DD.8020603@hardwarefreak.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: stan@hardwarefreak.com Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Le 21/12/2011 16:10, Stan Hoeppner a =E9crit : > 1. What mailbox format are you using? Is this a constant or variable? Maildir++ > 2. Is the Dovecot rev and config the same everywhere, before/after? Yes > 3. Are Dovecot instances using NFS to access the XFS volumes? NO. direct LVM volumes from SAN > 4. Is this a Dovecot 2.x cluster with director and NFS storage? > NO. This is dovecot plain & simple. When I go back to older kernels, the load go down. With newer kernel, = all is working well too, but load (as reported by uptime) is higher. Thanks, -- = Yann Dupont - Service IRTS, DSI Universit=E9 de Nantes Tel : 02.53.48.49.20 - Mail/Jabber : Yann.Dupont@univ-nantes.fr _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs