From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Jun 1 17:29:50 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mclean.mail.mindspring.net (mclean.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.57]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88BB437B43C; Fri, 1 Jun 2001 17:29:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from mindspring.com (dialup-209.245.128.214.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.245.128.214]) by mclean.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA24439; Fri, 1 Jun 2001 20:29:37 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3B18338C.4641B4F4@mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 17:30:04 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matt Dillon Cc: Robert Watson , Ian Dowse , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: UFS large directory performance References: <200106011806.f51I6PK85431@earth.backplane.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Matt Dillon wrote: > I can see this really helping mail queue performance, > especially when coupled with softupdates, and also > helping samba (windoz likes to scan directories), and > perhaps even squid to a degree. The new code is interesting; it will be enlightening to see it's real world performance. I'd definitely suggest using a zone for the allocations, however. FWIW: I guess if you are having problems with mail queue perofrmance, you are running postfix or qmail or something, instead of sendmail, with the mail queue divisions, or with my and David Wolfskill's per-domain mail queue patches? -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message