Re: Cyrus infrastructure performance less than expected

2008-04-29 Thread Eric Déchaux
Robert Banz a écrit : >> I don't have any system log that complains about something and the >> only >> Cyrus message I got is a DB4 warning about lockers. I think the DB4 in >> question is the TLS sessions cache DB and in my case the number of >> lockers can be as high as 8 000... >> > > Dum

Re: Cyrus infrastructure performance less than expected

2008-04-29 Thread Eric Déchaux
Rob Mueller a écrit : >> On current production platform the frontends use swap massively but the >> impact is far less than on the new platform. >> > > It's not so much how much swap is actually used, but how much is being paged > in or paged out at any time. If there are memory pages not bei

Re: Cyrus infrastructure performance less than expected

2008-04-29 Thread Eric Déchaux
Pascal Gienger a écrit : > Eric Déchaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> The older infrastructure can stand the 42 000 concurrent sessions, the >> new one can't : I was expecting each frontend to be able to handle 5 500 >> concurrent sessions but they are n

Re: Cyrus infrastructure performance less than expected

2008-04-28 Thread Eric Déchaux
Alain Spineux a écrit : > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:31 PM, Eric Déchaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> >> I have juste setup a Cyrus infrastructure based on VMware Virtual >> Infrastructure 3.0.1 and I have a huge performance proble

Re: Cyrus infrastructure performance less than expected

2008-04-28 Thread Eric Déchaux
Robert Banz a écrit : >> I don't have any system log that complains about something and the >> only >> Cyrus message I got is a DB4 warning about lockers. I think the DB4 in >> question is the TLS sessions cache DB and in my case the number of >> lockers can be as high as 8 000... > > Dump Berkel

Cyrus infrastructure performance less than expected

2008-04-28 Thread Eric Déchaux
Dear all, I have juste setup a Cyrus infrastructure based on VMware Virtual Infrastructure 3.0.1 and I have a huge performance problem. The new infrastructure was sized for 120 000 mailboxes with 42 000 maximum concurrent IMAPS sessions (neither POP3 nor IMAP available). The important point i