[Date Prev][Date Next]
Feature Request: Allow separate location of dn2id and id2entry (ITS#3377)
Thank you for your reply
I submit this issue because we need a great performance LDAP server,
so we care about it very much. I know I can use the symbol link, but I
think it will slower than access that database directly, right?
If I can configure it to separate disk, we can use two scsi card to
drive two diskes, I think it can promote performance than place them
in same card and disk.
If you think that feature is useless, I still have a question.
Can I the define the bdb databases' page size when I create them?
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 00:21:48 -0700, Howard Chu <email@example.com> wrote:
> firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> >Full_Name: Xin ZHAO
> >Version: 2.2.18
> >OS: FreeBSD
> >URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
> >Submission from: (NULL) (126.96.36.199)
> >A properly setting of block size for file system will increase or decrease
> >performance of file access. If it is possible to separate dn2id and id2entry
> >databases' location (Normally, the former uses 4K page size and the latter uses
> >16K), then it will be possible to separate them into different filesystems and
> >hence optimize performance for large file systems.
> It doesn't seem to me that such a feature would get very much use. You
> can just symlink the files to another location if you really need to.
> The size of the dn2id database page is not fixed at all, it is whatever
> the underlying filesystem uses, so it will already be optimal by
> default. The 16K of the id2entry database is already an even power-of-2
> and multiple of the common page sizes in use today, so I don't see any
> compelling reason to try to optimize it further.
> -- Howard Chu
> Chief Architect, Symas Corp. Director, Highland Sun
> http://www.symas.com http://highlandsun.com/hyc
> Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support