A quick and easy performance improvement

[Richard Lynch]

uxbod wrote:

>Why not hold the bayes on a RAM partition, and have a cronjob that periodically backs it up throughout the day so that changes are not lost if the server crashes ?
>  
>

That would definitely improve things.  Seek time in RAM is zero!

While monitoring disk I/Os (iostat 1) I was surprised at the high number 
for bayes.  I didn't expect to see it so high.  One my systems it was 
actually higher than the I/O for the mail queues.

-- Rich

>On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 11:21:57 -0400, Richard Lynch <rich at mail.wvnet.edu> wrote:
>  
>
>>Nathan Olson wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Would noatime affect bayes operation on /var/spool?
>>>
>>>Nate
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Noatime will probably help since it would reduce the number of I/O
>>operations to the disk -- fewer I/Os is good for performance.  If I
>>recall correctly, noatime means that the system will not update the last
>>access date for the file.  One less I/O will certainly help.  The
>>benefit I'm going after comes from reducing disk seek time by putting
>>the bayes DB closer to the mail queues.  For me, using pretty much a
>>default installation, the benefit was in decreasing the IOWait time to
>>1/10th that value it was.
>>
>>-- Rich
>>
>>--
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>


-- 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rich.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 308 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20060726/560f8849/rich.vcf