Building an MS-SA box

Peter Bonivart peter at UCGBOOK.COM
Sun Feb 22 13:55:35 GMT 2004

Jeff A. Earickson wrote:
> IMHO, you are better off running a cache/slave DNS like bind or
> tinydns.  On Solaris we have found that nscd can be a bottleneck,
> not a help.  When we moved our web service (apache) from HP to
> Solaris, we were getting really poor response until we turned off
> nscd.  I have it turned off on all of my Sun boxes, including
> my MailScanner box.  Others may have different insight on nscd.

I think the main target for Sun with nscd was to improve NIS
performance, therefore it caches more than just hosts. I haven't heard
of any problems with it for years, the last patch released for it was in
2001 for Solaris 8. Are your problems with nscd recent?

I'm using it with no problems. I have a host hit rate of 99.6% and after
being up for 129 days it's using 3 MB. That's OK with me. ;-)

/Peter Bonivart

--Unix lovers do it in the Sun

Sun Fire V210, Solaris 9, Sendmail 8.12.10, MailScanner 4.25-14,
SpamAssassin 2.63 + DCC 1.2.30, ClamAV 0.67 + GMP 4.1.2

More information about the MailScanner mailing list