From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri May 17 12:31:49 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from resnet.uoregon.edu (resnet.uoregon.edu [128.223.122.47]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D201337B411 for ; Fri, 17 May 2002 12:31:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (dwhite@localhost) by resnet.uoregon.edu (8.11.3/8.10.1) with ESMTP id g4HJVVE06847; Fri, 17 May 2002 12:31:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 12:31:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug White To: Hiten Pandya Cc: Peter Wemm , Omar Thameen , Subject: Re: tuning a CPU bound server In-Reply-To: <20020516230902.A398@hpdi.ath.cx> Message-ID: <20020517123114.G6300-100000@resnet.uoregon.edu> X-All-Your-Base: are belong to us MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII 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 On Thu, 16 May 2002, Hiten Pandya wrote: > --- Peter Wemm wrote: > > The only real problem that I know of with postfix is that it still > > suffers from select(2) collisions (FreeBSD kernel problem) when it tries > > to shut down a bunch of idle smtp senders. That can cause transient load > > average spikes - this can be a bit alarming but doesn't actually affect > > things very much. > > Just wondering, are these the kind of problems which can be solved by > using the kqueue(2) mechanism, or am I talking nuts again? You are welcome to rewrite qmail to use kqueue if you wish :) Doug White | FreeBSD: The Power to Serve dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu | www.FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message