Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot write activity (mostly 1.1.x)

2007-11-05 Thread mikkel
On Sun, November 4, 2007 4:32 pm, Timo Sirainen wrote: I didn't know that mail_nfs_index=yes resulted in a forced chown. How come that's necessary with NFS but not on local disks? It's used to flush NFS attribute cache. Enabling it allows you to use multiple servers to access the same

[Dovecot] Dovecot write activity (mostly 1.1.x)

2007-11-04 Thread mikkel
I’m experiencing write activity that’s somewhat different from my previous qmail/courier-imap/Maildir setup. This more outspoken in v.1.1.x than v1.0.x (I’m using Maildir). Write activity is about half that of read activity when measuring throughput. But when measuring operations it’s about 5-7

Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot write activity (mostly 1.1.x)

2007-11-04 Thread Timo Sirainen
On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 13:02 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Write activity is about half that of read activity when measuring throughput. But when measuring operations it’s about 5-7 times as high (measured with zpool iostat on ZFS). Have you tried with fsync_disable=yes? ZFS's fsyncing

Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot write activity (mostly 1.1.x)

2007-11-04 Thread mikkel
On Sun, November 4, 2007 1:51 pm, Timo Sirainen wrote: On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 13:02 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Write activity is about half that of read activity when measuring throughput. But when measuring operations it’s about 5-7 times as high (measured with zpool iostat on ZFS).

Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot write activity (mostly 1.1.x)

2007-11-04 Thread Timo Sirainen
On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 14:10 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Write activity is about half that of read activity when measuring throughput. But when measuring operations it’s about 5-7 times as high (measured with zpool iostat on ZFS). Have you tried with fsync_disable=yes? ZFS's

Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot write activity (mostly 1.1.x)

2007-11-04 Thread mikkel
On Sun, November 4, 2007 2:20 pm, Timo Sirainen wrote: Well, if you use only clients that don't really need indexes they could just slow things down. You could try disabling indexes to see how it works then (:INDEX=MEMORY to mail_location). I tried that earlier and it did result in less

Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot write activity (mostly 1.1.x)

2007-11-04 Thread mikkel
On Sun, November 4, 2007 2:54 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You could truss the hanging process to see what it's doing. It's not an easy task since the delay is sometimes just a few (5-10) seconds. And when there is a complete stall the client aborts before I can find the process. But I'll

Re: [Dovecot] Dovecot write activity (mostly 1.1.x)

2007-11-04 Thread Timo Sirainen
On Sun, 2007-11-04 at 15:27 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: chown([path]/Maildir/dovecot-uidlist, 105, -1) = 0 stat64([path]/Maildir/dovecot-uidlist, 0xFFBFF2F0) = 0 stat64([path]/Maildir/dovecot.index.log, 0xFFBFDAE0) = 0 chown([path]/Maildir/dovecot.index.log, 105, -1) = 0