thanks for your answer and sorry about the typo, that was 1 million mails per day ! and it is being handled by our own sendmail and popd thank you _______________ marko milovanovic > On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 11:04:05AM +0100, marko milovanovic wrote: > > hi everyone! > > does anyone know about ext3 having been used on very loaded servers (say 1 > > billion mail per day as well as thousands of web pages served every > > seconds)? > > i'll be glad to know if it stands the load! > > Inside Red Hat, we do exhaustive stress testing on all of our kernel > builds before they ever reach the public. That involves things like > having 8-way SMP boxes with 8GB of memory pounding a series of > network, VM, CPU, filesystem and disk-level IO stress loads *in > parallel* for 3 days at a stretch. That all gets done with ext3, and > we'll often get weeks of that testing done with up to a dozen test > machines at once on any given revision of ext3 before a big release if > there are a lot of changes involved. > > As for the loads you are talking about... I doubt if you'll find any > Linux software anywhere capable of dealing with 11,000 emails per > second. That's 11 per millisecond. That's under 100 microseconds per > email *total* cost. If you can find any single Unix host capable of > that, I'd be interested in seeing how they managed it. :-) sorry about that, that was 1 million mails per day ! it is handled by our own sendmail and popd > The thousands-of-pages web load has been demonstrated under Linux (Tux > can do that easily enough), but that sort of load is mainly readonly > as far as the filesystem is concerned so both ext2 and ext3 should > cope OK. Email is *heavily* write-intensive on the filesystem, and > includes a lot of synchronised IO operations (you can't ack an > incoming email until it's secured on disk). I doubt any Linux > filesystem will give the performance you want for that, though it > might be interesting to try, and the 2.6 kernel may eventually have > the IO bandwidth to do it if you spread the load over a couple of > dozen disks. > > The obstacle is more likely to be performance than reliability, > though. ext3 should "stand the load", but whether any current Linux > disk-based filesystem can give the level of write performance needed > for 11,000 emails per second is doubtful at best! > > Cheers, > Stephen > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ext3-users@redhat.com > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ext3-users ______________________________________________________________________________ ifrance.com, l'email gratuit le plus complet de l'Internet ! vos emails depuis un navigateur, en POP3, sur Minitel, sur le WAP... http://www.ifrance.com/_reloc/email.emailif
