On 11/16/2012 08:33 AM, Howard Chu wrote:
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.
Gee, thanks for advertising for OpenLDAP/Symas on the 389 list.
--
389 users mailing list
389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
