Prev: Consolidating Virtual Domain Delivery
Next: notification message size to receiver
From: Ralf Hildebrandt on 29 Mar 2010 05:07
During my internal performance tests I noticed the fsstone program and
wondered what became of your ide to use append/truncate instead of
generating new queuefiles.

From http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2004-07/0991.html

"Early measurements have shown that disk overhead
can be reduced dramatically by using append/truncate instead of
create/rename/delete."

--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Campus Benjamin Franklin
Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin
Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962
ralf.hildebrandt(a)charite.de | http://www.charite.de


From: Wietse Venema on 29 Mar 2010 07:12
Ralf Hildebrandt:
> During my internal performance tests I noticed the fsstone program and
> wondered what became of your ide to use append/truncate instead of
> generating new queuefiles.
>
> From http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2004-07/0991.html
>
> "Early measurements have shown that disk overhead
> can be reduced dramatically by using append/truncate instead of
> create/rename/delete."

Early stress tests also demonstrated that Postfix was up to 3 times
faster than qmail when relaying small SMTP messages.

I'll put the scarce time into finishing postscreen, and worry about
queue performance later.

Wietse

 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Consolidating Virtual Domain Delivery
Next: notification message size to receiver