It's getting pounded with the kernel mailing list archives, or the ftp
archives?  

Is it linux, or some other unix?  Is syslog taking a ton of CPU?  If so, you
can almost eliminate that by putting a "-" in front of each filename in your
/etc/syslog.conf file.  So /var/log/maillog would become -/var/log/maillog.
This tells syslog not to do an fsync on every single log line, it will hold
some in memory, and write in bunches. (Note the the "-" trick only works in
Linux AFAIK), Even if it's not taking a ton of CPU, it's still fighting for
disk I/O with postfix, and you should use the "-" anyway.  

Also, I noticed about a 40% increase in speed with the postfix
snapshot-20011127 over 20010808.  You might wanna give that a shot.  And
putting your spool directory on the last partition on the disk helps a ton
also, because the disk is spinning faster towards the outside edges.  You
can typically increase your seek times by a couple of milliseconds doing
this, which doesn't sound like a lot, but over 10,000 seeks, this adds up to
about 20 seconds, and when doing a run through the queue you can easily need
to do that many seeks as fast as possible.  I typically have a ton of mail
on my postfix boxes, so moving my spool directory to the last partition on
the disk has increased my performance by quite a bit.  I've also started
doing remote logging from all of my mailservers.  By doing this, postfix
doesn't have to fight at all with syslog for disk access, and that has also
increased my performance.  

Basically, I went from an average of 160ms to inject a message into the
queue using the default settings, to now about an average of 35ms for each
message injected after tweaking everything.  Installing the 20011127
snapshot brought me down from 60ms to 35ms just by itself.  

Jay



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Clay Fandre [mailto:clay at fandre.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:28 AM
> To: tclug-list at mn-linux.org
> Subject: Re: [TCLUG] USB Mouse
> 
> 
> What kind of box is it? What's the bottle-neck, the CPU? Is 
> it time to upgrade? We could start a "New TCLUG Server" fund 
> or something. 
> 
> That reminds me, I started to look into registering the TCLUG 
> as non-profit, but as I started reading up on it, my head 
> started to hurt with all that legal mumbo-jumbo. Anyone have 
> experience with this type of thing? Anyone have free time to 
> try and get this done?
> 
> On Tue, 04 Dec 2001, Nate Carlson wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Austad, Jay wrote:
> > > Wow, I sent the message below at Tue, 27 Nov 2001 
> 13:32:03 -0600, and it
> > > didn't show up until today.  Bob, do you have
> > > local_destination_concurrency_limit set really low?
> > 
> > Box is just being pounded to crap with the Linux kernel archives..
> > 
> > -- 
> > Nate Carlson <natecars at real-time.com>   | Phone : (952)943-8700
> > http://www.real-time.com                | Fax   : (952)943-8500
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Twin Cities Linux Users Group Mailing List - 
> Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota
> > http://www.mn-linux.org
> > tclug-list at mn-linux.org
> > https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list
> _______________________________________________
> Twin Cities Linux Users Group Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. 
> Paul, Minnesota
> http://www.mn-linux.org
> tclug-list at mn-linux.org
> https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list
>