[Date Prev][Date Next]
RE: HDB Tuning
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Buchan Milne [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 12:17 AM
> Is there any reason you didn't include BDB as well ?
We have a reasonably high write component in our system so we thought we'd go straight for HDB. From my fairly limited reading, I get the impression that HDB >= BDB, although I've seen nothing criticising HDB comparative to BDB. Is it something we should also consider? For what reasons?
> How many entries in the database, or how large is it (du *.bdb) ?
1.3GB, 800k entries in one database. No glue or other overlays.
> I think you need (more?) idlcache, configured in slapd.conf inside the
> database. And, if you don't have any, you also need a cachesize configured
> (in the same place). See the man page for slapd-hdb (or slapd-bdb). IIRC
> guideline for idlcache on hdb is approx three times the cachesize (which
> will have to decide on).
Bingo! Adding the idlcachesize made a world of difference, thanks! I didn't check that man page so never realised the index caching config directive had changed. I've followed the 3x rule and it's super-speedy now.