: 446M Active, 1646M Inact, 236M Wired, 138M Cache, 112M Buf, 30M Free
Swap: 2048M Total, 164K Used, 2048M Free
Adding swap is unlikely to help you, as you're not really using much memory.
I also have assumed in the past that db performance could be better if I
get off the system RAID-5 and put
After reading tuning, it suggests the SWAP should be double RAM.
According to dmesg...
installing database on RAID-5 or asking if to add swap (when almost none
is used)? what is more stupid? whould we vote?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 15:53 -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Robert Fitzpatrick [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I also have assumed in the past that db performance could be better if I
get off the system RAID-5 and put it on 1+0? The system has 4 SATA
drives.
That will speed things up if IO
In response to Robert Fitzpatrick [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 15:53 -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Robert Fitzpatrick [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I also have assumed in the past that db performance could be better if I
get off the system RAID-5 and put it on 1+0
On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 22:19 +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
real memory = 3220635648 (3071 MB)
avail memory = 3150565376 (3004 MB)
we have 3GB of RAM available with actually 4GB physical RAM installed?
If you're using a 32-bit (i386) kernel you need PAE. Or
Total, 164K Used, 2048M Free
I also have assumed in the past that db performance could be better if I
get off the system RAID-5 and put it on 1+0? The system has 4 SATA
drives.
All servers running FreeBSD 6.2 and latest ports of postfix+amavisd-maia
+SA+ClamAV. Thanks for any input.
--
Robert
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
real memory = 3220635648 (3071 MB)
avail memory = 3150565376 (3004 MB)
we have 3GB of RAM available with actually 4GB physical RAM installed?
If you're using a 32-bit (i386) kernel you need PAE. Or switch to 64-bit
(amd64).
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP
In response to Robert Fitzpatrick [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 22:19 +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
real memory = 3220635648 (3071 MB)
avail memory = 3150565376 (3004 MB)
we have 3GB of RAM available with actually 4GB physical RAM installed?
On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 16:34 -0500, Bill Moran wrote:
In response to Robert Fitzpatrick [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I don't know anything about amavisd's usage of databases. If it's doing
a lot of small writes, then it's likely that getting off RAID 5 will make
a marked difference.
I believe this is
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 10:17:09PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
After reading tuning, it suggests the SWAP should be double RAM.
According to dmesg...
installing database on RAID-5 or asking if to add swap (when almost none
is used)? what is more stupid? whould we vote?
That is not a
On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 22:17 +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
After reading tuning, it suggests the SWAP should be double RAM.
According to dmesg...
installing database on RAID-5 or asking if to add swap (when almost none
is used)? what is more stupid? whould we vote?
That was my whole point
is used)? what is more stupid? whould we vote?
That was my whole point of showing you the low usage. I take that as a
yes, RAID 1+0 would provide a dramatic difference in speed, thanks!
the only adventage of RAID-5 is less wasted space than RAID-1. one and
the only adventage. write
On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 22:49 +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
is used)? what is more stupid? whould we vote?
That was my whole point of showing you the low usage. I take that as a
yes, RAID 1+0 would provide a dramatic difference in speed, thanks!
the only adventage of RAID-5 is less wasted
use systat
Using 'systat -iostat' it shows mostly idle with 25-70 MB/s on the aacd0
array. Most of time above 50. Thanks for the help!
--
Robert
70MB/s can't be mostly idle. or you meant CPU mostly idle.
changing to RAID-not5 will help. seeking why disk traffic is so high -
will help even
14 matches
Mail list logo
