improving concurrency/performance

[Sergio Devojno Bruder]

Jure Pečar wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 03:58:15 -0200
> Sergio Devojno Bruder <bruder at haxent.com.br> wrote:
> 
>>In our experience FS-wise, ReiserFS is the worst performer between ext3, 
>>XFS e ReiserFS (with tailBLAH turned on or off) for a Cyrus Backend (>1M 
>>mailboxes in 3 partitions per backend, 0.5TB each partition).
> 
> Interesting ... can you provide some numbers, even from memory?
> 
> I always thought that reiserfs is best suited for jobs like this. Also, I'm
> quite happy with it, but I havent done any hard-core scientific
> measurements.

 From memory: 2 backends, same hardware (xeons), same storage, same 
number of mailboxes (aprox). One with ext3 spools, other with reiserFS 
spools. the reiserFS one was handling half the simultaneous use of the 
ext3 one.

--
Sergio Bruder