Building an MS-SA box

[Julian Field]

At 13:55 22/02/2004, you wrote:
>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?

Yes, with Solaris 9 with all patches.

>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. ;-)

Thanks for that. I'll take a look to ensure I am fully patched, and see if
there are any configuration options to limit its memory use.
--
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
Professional Support Services at www.MailScanner.biz
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support
PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654