[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: [ldap] Implementation Suggestions
- To: Daniel Henninger <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: [ldap] Implementation Suggestions
- From: matthew sporleder <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:43:17 -0500
- Cc: openldap-software@OpenLDAP.org
- Content-disposition: inline
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=C0b0F9mdWinCLTxTSZgxmuy3ywpi5fjE4qlcHEqNNm5xdRc1AcRBq5gLj4QhJpc38/pQnJpEEECQe9HmRDgiyDzWMg0ngDmiQB0rl6DStX0hOJLePE4U46rgjk6Bn6VdaQjIq2k93Mk0jxBWyqVa16jhbRmfw24xWUwR5KfFCZ0=
- In-reply-to: <E7663440-CC7B-4767-9485-64206582FB22@ncsu.edu>
- References: <43508E0210EAFBF4FF6FE203@cadabra-sw.stanford.edu> <E7663440-CC7B-4767-9485-64206582FB22@ncsu.edu>
> >> 1. Separate directory from account data . . . perhaps using refers of
> >> some sort to "make it look" like they're all one server/service.
> >> Directory stuff is by far the most intensely searched, updated, and
> >> involves "unusual" queries instead of a simple "give me this one
> >> entry,
> >> thanks".
Splitting up your DIT can give some performance improvements if you
have separate storage for each part. back-meta may also give you some
flexibility options. You may also want to review your indexing
> >> 2. Is Solaris causing too much of a bottleneck I/O wise? It seems
> >> to be
> >> notorious for having slower I/O than Linux, so I'm wondering if
> >> that's
> >> part of my problem. This is Solaris 8 btw.
Solaris 9 started huge updates to the disk system and Solaris 10 keeps
it going. (Although they were always faster than linux, in my
opinion) Upgrading to Solaris 10 will give you a boost for free.
If you want to stick with solaris 8, there are a lot of articles out
there about tuning solaris disks with fsflushr-related settings. Look
at docs.sun.com for solaris 8 /etc/system tunables. Even if you
upgrade, you should look into your OS tunables for such an I/O-intense
service as ldap.
> >> 3. Maybe I have Berkeley DB configured like crap? Thing is I
> >> can't seem