RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude using 50% cpu

[Kami Razvan]

Title: Message

Hi John:   I totally agree with you... RAID 5 is best suited for that purpose.   The only reason we have it as such is simply because of redundancy.  The best for mailboxes is RAID 0+1.  RAID 5 gives us the ease of adding more storage and more redundancy.   But You are right..   Regards, Kami     -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Tolmachoff (Lists) Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 11:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude using 50% cpu Morning Kami.   Hate to differ, but I disagree, as I am sure others will, on using RAID 5 for mail boxes. The mail boxes are heavy Read AND Write. RAID 5 will slow performance in heavy write usage. RAID 5 is best and shines the greatest in mainly Read situations, like databases that use transaction logs to do most of the constant writing. (Where the transaction log sits on RAID 1 or 0+1.)   John Tolmachoff MCSE CSSA Engineer/Consultant eServices For You www.eservicesforyou.com   -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kami Razvan Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 3:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude using 50% cpu   Mark:   I might have missed it in case you mentioned it.   What is your drive configuration?  I believe that also can make a lot of difference.   It is best to have your spool directory separate from your mailboxes.  Our configuration is as follows:   1:  RAID 0+1:  OS & Application 2:  RAID 0+1:  Spool 3:  RAID 5:  Mailboxes   I believe performance increase can also be made if the Pagefile is separated and put in its own drive but we do not have it.   I am not sure if in your case it will solve the problem but I have a feeling it can help.   Regards, Kami   -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Gordon Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 3:51 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude using 50% cpu On a good day we rev 19000 local deliveries + send 8000 per day. It hits the machine hard average cpu time before was around 44% then when declude was installed it jumped to over 90% average. The version is 1.75 -----Original Message----- From: R. Scott Perry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 3:37 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude using 50% cpu   >We are evaluating declude and have noticed a considerable increase in the >cpu cycles associated with mail delivery. Is there anyway have it run in >an isolated cpu instance? since there are multiple instances of >declude.exe running, I would guess it would be hard to lock it down. How many E-mails do you send/receive per day? What version of Declude are you running (you can find out by typing "\IMail\Declude -diag" from a command prompt)? Are you sure that it is Declude using the extra CPU cycles (by sorting the processes in the Task Manager by the "CPU" column)?                                                     -Scott --- Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers. Declude Virus: Catches known viruses and is the leader in mailserver vulnerability detection. Find out what you have been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list.  To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail".  The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.