Spamassassin cache in mysql - feature request
ecasarero at gmail.com
Tue Mar 17 18:49:38 GMT 2009
2009/3/17 Jonas Akrouh Larsen <jonas at vrt.dk>:
>> IMHO running the cache.db in tmpfs (on ram) should be faster than
>> mysql over tcp, however it depends on your configuration. just a
>> balance between pros/cons.
> I think you missed the point, i think we can all agree the sqllite db on
> tmpfs is faster, but if u can share the cache between ur nodes, you should
> have a higher cache hit ratio as far as I can figure.
> Whether or not this cache hit ratio increase is worth the penalty of
> querying a central sql server is the question I guess.
> Even if you got a replication setup, so you query the sql server running on
> the local host, it will still be slower than sqllite on tmpfs.
> My 5 cents.
I did some research in 1 of my servers, today i've procesed 8505
emails, with 338 cache hits. How can we measure if sharnig caches
improves (a lot, a little, nothing) cache hits? (there is another
server next to it) Obviously without much development so we can test
if having a mysql server improves or not the scenario.
> Med venlig hilsen / Best regards
> Jonas Akrouh Larsen
> TechBiz ApS
> Laplandsgade 4, 2. sal
> 2300 København S
> Office: 7020 0979
> Direct: 3336 9974
> Mobile: 5120 1096
> Fax: 7020 0978
> Web: www.techbiz.dk
> MailScanner mailing list
> mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
> Before posting, read http://wiki.mailscanner.info/posting
> Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
More information about the MailScanner