[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: Less aggressive syncrepl ?

To: masarati@aero.polimi.it, Jorgen Lundman <lundman@lundman.net>
Subject: Re: Less aggressive syncrepl ?
From: Quanah Gibson-Mount <quanah@zimbra.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2010 12:42:54 -0800
Cc: openldap-software@openldap.org
Content-disposition: inline
In-reply-to: <4d1e128c2452e686193f5b4851a0fca8.squirrel@www.aero.polimi.it>
References: <4B8C8571.8050909@lundman.net> <4d1e128c2452e686193f5b4851a0fca8.squirrel@www.aero.polimi.it>

--On Tuesday, March 02, 2010 7:58 PM +0100 masarati@aero.polimi.it wrote:

25 consumers doing a full refresh probably ate up all threads available on
the producer.  You should either cascade your consumers (build a
replication chain where a layer of consumers acts as producers for the
remaining), or increase the number of threads on the producer.


Using delta-syncrepl can also help reduce such a load.

--Quanah


--

Quanah Gibson-Mount
Principal Software Engineer
Zimbra, Inc
--------------------
Zimbra ::  the leader in open source messaging and collaboration

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Less aggressive syncrepl ?
  - From: Jorgen Lundman <lundman@lundman.net>

References:
- Less aggressive syncrepl ?
  - From: Jorgen Lundman <lundman@lundman.net>
- Re: Less aggressive syncrepl ?
  - From: masarati@aero.polimi.it

Prev by Date: Re: understanding replication
Next by Date: Re: Less aggressive syncrepl ?
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread