On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:08:18AM +0100, Thomas Hummel wrote: > -> Does it make sense
Sorry, I was unclear. Let me rephrase : from my understanding of the doc, process_min_avail seems to have a slightly different behavior depending of if service_count is 1 or 0. Is it correct ? The doc states that process_min_avail in the case of service_count = 1 is used to avoid latency and in the case of service_count = 0 to make sure not only the one imap-login is used (if below the client_limit threshold). Why would it make no sense to set (service_count=0) process_min_avail > number of cpu ? Because there is no fork/exec of another imap-login latency ? Besides, why would process_limit be reached since service_count=0 means that this one imap-login process handles an unlimited number of connections ? Thanks -- Thomas Hummel | Institut Pasteur <[email protected]> | Groupe Exploitation et Infrastructure
