Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 14:09:01 +0200 From: Neil Blakey-Milner <nbm@mithrandr.moria.org> To: marchart@schotten.at Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 4.2 vs LINUX (qmail) Message-ID: <20010106140901.A9400@mithrandr.moria.org> In-Reply-To: <004d01c077cd$f280c420$1a37743e@it4you.at>; from marchart@schotten.at on Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 11:46:38AM %2B0100 References: <004d01c077cd$f280c420$1a37743e@it4you.at>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat 2001-01-06 (11:46), marchart@schotten.at wrote: > Delivery of 200 local emails: > > FreeBSD 4.2: 300 Sec > FreeBSD 4.0: 70 Sec > SuSE Linux : 6 Sec Are you using ext2fs, or reiserfs? If ext2fs, remember that ext2fs does asynchronous metadata writes, and thus it favours speed over reliability. You can either turn off the asynchronous metadata writes, or use the directory sync patch for qmail. If you're using reiserfs, if you're delivering to the same maildir, it might have an advantage due to the non-linear hashed directory lookups. If you aren't already using softupdates for FreeBSD, you should be. However, your times seem improbable for a general FreeBSD problem, as I get much better than 200 deliveries in 5 minutes on FreeBSD 4.2, without softupdates. Are you using the same delivery method for both systems? Do you have the same concurrencylocal settings on both? Do the systems have similar resources (limits, physical hardware, &c.)? How did you inject the messages? Were they preinjected, and then the queue ran, or was it with a live queue (qmail-send)? Neil -- Neil Blakey-Milner nbm@mithrandr.moria.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010106140901.A9400>