It's getting pounded with the kernel mailing list archives, or the ftp archives? Is it linux, or some other unix? Is syslog taking a ton of CPU? If so, you can almost eliminate that by putting a "-" in front of each filename in your /etc/syslog.conf file. So /var/log/maillog would become -/var/log/maillog. This tells syslog not to do an fsync on every single log line, it will hold some in memory, and write in bunches. (Note the the "-" trick only works in Linux AFAIK), Even if it's not taking a ton of CPU, it's still fighting for disk I/O with postfix, and you should use the "-" anyway. Also, I noticed about a 40% increase in speed with the postfix snapshot-20011127 over 20010808. You might wanna give that a shot. And putting your spool directory on the last partition on the disk helps a ton also, because the disk is spinning faster towards the outside edges. You can typically increase your seek times by a couple of milliseconds doing this, which doesn't sound like a lot, but over 10,000 seeks, this adds up to about 20 seconds, and when doing a run through the queue you can easily need to do that many seeks as fast as possible. I typically have a ton of mail on my postfix boxes, so moving my spool directory to the last partition on the disk has increased my performance by quite a bit. I've also started doing remote logging from all of my mailservers. By doing this, postfix doesn't have to fight at all with syslog for disk access, and that has also increased my performance. Basically, I went from an average of 160ms to inject a message into the queue using the default settings, to now about an average of 35ms for each message injected after tweaking everything. Installing the 20011127 snapshot brought me down from 60ms to 35ms just by itself. Jay > -----Original Message----- > From: Clay Fandre [mailto:clay at fandre.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:28 AM > To: tclug-list at mn-linux.org > Subject: Re: [TCLUG] USB Mouse > > > What kind of box is it? What's the bottle-neck, the CPU? Is > it time to upgrade? We could start a "New TCLUG Server" fund > or something. > > That reminds me, I started to look into registering the TCLUG > as non-profit, but as I started reading up on it, my head > started to hurt with all that legal mumbo-jumbo. Anyone have > experience with this type of thing? Anyone have free time to > try and get this done? > > On Tue, 04 Dec 2001, Nate Carlson wrote: > > > On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Austad, Jay wrote: > > > Wow, I sent the message below at Tue, 27 Nov 2001 > 13:32:03 -0600, and it > > > didn't show up until today. Bob, do you have > > > local_destination_concurrency_limit set really low? > > > > Box is just being pounded to crap with the Linux kernel archives.. > > > > -- > > Nate Carlson <natecars at real-time.com> | Phone : (952)943-8700 > > http://www.real-time.com | Fax : (952)943-8500 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Twin Cities Linux Users Group Mailing List - > Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota > > http://www.mn-linux.org > > tclug-list at mn-linux.org > > https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list > _______________________________________________ > Twin Cities Linux Users Group Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. > Paul, Minnesota > http://www.mn-linux.org > tclug-list at mn-linux.org > https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list >