directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Quanah Gibson-Mount <qua...@stanford.edu>
Subject Re: Benchmarks feedback
Date Tue, 27 Mar 2007 22:21:56 GMT
--On Wednesday, March 28, 2007 12:17 AM +0200 Emmanuel Lecharny 
<elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:

> Quanah Gibson-Mount a écrit :
>
>> --On Tuesday, March 27, 2007 11:29 PM +0200 Emmanuel Lecharny
>> <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Unfortunately, one that is not proprietary is of course desired.
>>>
>>>
>>> This is why slamd seams a good tool. If its performance is bad, then
>>> it's
>>> up to the users to improve it. Version 2.0.0 seems promizing, with
>>> another backend (BDB JE)
>>
>>
>> I use 2.0 checked out of CVS. ;)  And I've got plenty of network
>> bandwidth at the moment (1GB between all systems).  It certainly can
>> do what is necessary as long as I give it enough machines to do the
>> work.  I'd just prefer to use fewer than I do now. ;)
>
> Interesting. How does it compares to 1.8, so far ? Is it faster? (I agree
> that everybody is not lucky enough to have as many server as google have
> in his basement :)

It is definitely much faster in term of pulling up folders that have 
hundreds of results in them.  I don't see that the client interaction with 
the LDAP server and the feeding back of results to the master slamd is any 
faster. ;)  The instability issues with the clients that I've encountered 
from the start seem to remain, as well.  Periodically one will just lock 
up, and I'll have to restart an optimization job over, which can cost me 
many hours of time. :/

--Quanah


--
Quanah Gibson-Mount
Senior Systems Software Developer
ITS/Shared Application Services
Stanford University
GnuPG Public Key: http://www.stanford.edu/~quanah/pgp.html

Mime
View raw message