389-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:30:26 -0500 From: P R <pwrdevman@xxxxxxxxx>
First off, my server is equipped with 12GB of physical memory. From reading tuning guides online, I’ve found that a starting estimate for the ‘dbcachesize’ = SUM(allDB4files). For one of my directory instances, the id2entry.db4 file alone is ~ 11GB.
Wow, still manually tuning cache sizes, how quaint.
Performance wise, would it be worthwhile to increase the amount of physical memory on the server (perhaps 64-128GB)? Or does 11GB for an id2entry seem like an extremely high value that’s out of the operating capabilities of the directory? Is it unheard of for a production directory server to be equipped with 64GB of physical memory?
Dunno about 389DS, but there are production OpenLDAP installations out there running on 64-core machines with over a terabyte of RAM. (The NoSQL/Big Data guys are just noisy children, really...) They serve directories with hundreds of millions to billions of entries. 11GB sounds pretty trivial to me.
So no, it's not unheard of. It's not even very extreme, really. -- -- Howard Chu CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/ -- 389 users mailing list 389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
