Re: Future of Qmail-LDAP
Scott Ryan <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.qmail.ldap |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
The load could be a result of I/O wait. Remember that qmail's queuing process is quite disk I/O intensive. Do you see any increase of the local queue? On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Ibrahim Harrani <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I wonder, am I only the one who is experiencing this problem? > Is there anyone has the same problem? > > > Thanks. > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Ibrahim Harrani <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> In this qmail test, CPU idle was almost zero. CPU time was mostly used by >> system. >> >> In the same test, if you set max connection to 100/200 via tcpserver and >> don't change anyhing in xstress side(still opening 600 connection). The >> load is quite low. So I decided that the reason is forking many qmail-smtpd >> ? >> >>> >>> >>> CPU load has not realy much todo with how busy a system is. It is >>> possible >>> to have a cpu load of 1000 without even noticing it. It just means that >>> there are more processes ready to run. >>> >>> -- >>> :wq Claudio >> > > -- Scott Ryan http://bonoboslr.wordpress.com/