On Thu, 2016-06-30 at 20:01 -0600, Rich Megginson wrote:
> On 06/30/2016 07:52 PM, William Brown wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've been thinking about this for a while, so I decided to dump my
> > thoughts to a document. I think I won't get to implementing this for a
> > while, but it would really help our server performance.
> >
> > http://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/logging-performance-improvement.html
>
> Looks good. Can we quantify the current log overhead?
Sure, I could probably sit down and work out a way to bench mark
this .....
But without the alternative being written, hard to say. I could always
patch out logging and drop the lock in a hacked build so we can show
what "without logging contention" looks like?
>
> >
> >
> > --
> > 389-devel mailing list
> > 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
>
> --
> 389-devel mailing list
> 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
--
Sincerely,
William Brown
Software Engineer
Red Hat, Brisbane
No comments:
Post a Comment