This is a discussion on Re: [courier-users] NFS server load thru the roof within the Courier-Imap forums, part of the Mail Servers and Related category; > > > We have much the same system setup and problems described here: > > > > > > ...
|
|||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|||
|
> > > We have much the same system setup and problems described here:
> > > > > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.mail.i....general/21782 > > > > > > Briefly, mail spool is mounted over NFS, everything runs smoothly > until > > > we > > > turn IMAP on and server load goes off the scale (NFS client load 300, > NFS > > > server load 10, with server in wait about 80% of the time). There are > no > > > discernable errors in our logs, and everything still "works", albiet at > a > > > snail's pace. <snip> > > > Although it is curious that our MTA (postfix) does not incur any load > hit > > > at all, and we are delivering hundreds of mails an hour at least. > Should > > > Courier IMAP be that much more of a heavy hitter?? > > How big are your users's mailspools? almost 100G. Until last evening, we had 20K users in one flat directory. I had read that that is not a problem in reiserfs, but just to be sure, we hashed the whole user base out overnight, and today the problem remains, so.... > the MTA is only going to be delivering one message at a time, but > courier-imap is going want to check every file in the mailboxes the user > is accessing to get the message headers. Makes sense > I had the same problem with Imap with the mail spool on AFS when the > working > set size of the users reading mail via imap exceeded the local AFS disk > cache. It was solved by increasing the afs cache size. (I'm currently at > around a 10GB AFS cache). Er, I am not sure where/how to look at and adjust that kind of setting, but would be very willing to try if you can provide any tips or links. I didn't think that NFS dealt with disk logistics itself... > What version of NFS are you using? I'm pretty sure that nfs is going to > require a network round-trip for *every* message in the currently active > imap folder, and it is likely not doing any local cacheing. Latest and greatest v4. Huh, so what are you suggesting? THANK YOU for responding! __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/.../courier-users |