> Howard Chu wrote: >>> - Log ----------------------------------------------------------------- >>> commit 0ab841598ffb490f4246f892248f0b409e411cc1 >>> Author: Howard Chu<h...@symas.com> >>> Date: Sun Sep 18 16:39:18 2011 -0700 >>> >>> Fix 09006ccec7928c9cf53bca6abe741e8d4d466c98 >>> >>> Check for stale DBs was in the wrong place. >> >> Since back-mdb does no caching, it's OK to run slapadd while slapd is >> running; >> slapd will see the new data immediately. In fact you can run multiple >> slapds >> on the same database and they will stay perfectly in sync. I'm not sure >> that >> that's actually a useful thing to do, but you can do it if you want... > > To answer my own question - apparently it's useful to get around > bottlenecks > in the slapd connection manager. Over 123,000 searches/second using two > slapds > on the same mdb database. At this point core#0 was at 99.5% busy in soft > interrupts. The slapds were only using (combined) 1250% CPU. > > http://highlandsun.com/hyc/slamd-mdb/jobs/job_20110918191657-463348391.html
... which goes back to LDAP's original purpose: lots of reads, occasional writes. Sounds like back-mdb is LDAP's holy graal :) p.
