On 6/27/2011 6:06 PM, Noel Butler wrote:
I hope this is a lightly used server and does not do any real level of
mail traffic else you'll soon regret running in any VM :)
Just all the mailing lists I subscribe to :)
means NFS. My initial testing shows NFS results in a dramatically
reduced performance for Dovecot. Given that this NFS access is going to
Hrmmm, something amiss somewhere then, I'd put it down to the VM, many
people on this list use NFS
and have no problems.
Well - the wiki tells me, "Both the mmap_disable and indexing to NFS
will result in a notable performance hit."
Though you have not mentioned what version you run, on 1.2.x using:
mmap_disable = yes
mail_nfs_storage = yes
mail_nfs_index = yes
Why do people insist on specifics :) ? At the moment, 2.0.13.
Something still a bit unclear - cue Timo interjection here. The
parameters listed for nfs installations (mmap_disable,
doctlock_use_excl, mail_nfs_storage, mail_nfs_index) - are they
necessary for data integrity, and/or do they compensate for NFS latency
and improve performance? My confusion stems from the unusual? condition
where the mail store is NFS based - but is otherwise dedicated to the
single Dovecot instance, so simultaneous writes & locking *shouldn't* be
a concern.
Particularly as I'm using mdbox, local index storage seems inappropriate
(as I don't want any critical data stored within a virtual image).
--
Daniel
