[Date Prev][Date Next]
RE: loglevel expected performance impact
How does your syslog config look like ?
Did you prefix the filename with the magic - symbol in order to ask for async I/Os on that file?
Typically messages are logged to real files. The file has to be specified with full
pathname, beginning with a slash ??/??.
You may prefix each entry with the minus ??-?? sign to omit syncing the file after every
logging. Note that you might lose information if the system crashes right behind a
write attempt. Nevertheless this might give you back some performance, especially if
you run programs that use logging in a very verbose manner.
From: openldap-technical-bounces@OpenLDAP.org [mailto:openldap-technical-bounces@OpenLDAP.org] On Behalf Of Berend De Schouwer
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 12:28 PM
Subject: loglevel expected performance impact
I'm running some 2.4.23 servers, and I've encountered some slowdown on loglevel other than 0. Even 256 (stats; recommended) impacts about a 4x slowdown on queries. Logging is to syslog.
Running ldapsearch slows from 0.005-0.010 seconds to about 0.030-0.040 seconds; and that includes loading the binary. That's from localhost to remove potential DNS lookups.
I stumbled across this when logging was wrong, and the slowdown was 100x.
I'm aware that 2.4.23 isn't the latest version. I'm also quite happy, for now, to run loglevel 0.
I'm wondering if this is the expected behaviour, given that it's the recommended configuration. Or should I go dig to find the slowdown?
(I did check the indexes, and db_stats, etc. All seems fine.)
I apologise for the disclaimer,
The contents of and attachments to this e-mail are intended for the addressee only, and may contain the confidential information of Argility (Proprietary) Limited and/or its subsidiaries. Any review, use or dissemination thereof by anyone other than the intended addressee is prohibited.
If you are not the intended addressee please notify the writer immediately and destroy the e-mail. Argility (Proprietary) Limited and its subsidiaries distance themselves from and accept no liability for unauthorised use of their e-mail facilities or e-mails sent other than strictly for business purposes.