-----Original Message----- From: Buchan Milne [mailto:bgmilne@staff.telkomsa.net] Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 12:17 AM
Is there any reason you didn't include BDB as well ?
We have a reasonably high write component in our system so we thought we'd go straight for HDB. From my fairly limited reading, I get the impression that HDB >= BDB, although I've seen nothing criticising HDB comparative to BDB. Is it something we should also consider? For what reasons?
How many entries in the database, or how large is it (du *.bdb) ?
1.3GB, 800k entries in one database. No glue or other overlays.
I think you need (more?) idlcache, configured in slapd.conf inside the database. And, if you don't have any, you also need a cachesize configured (in the same place). See the man page for slapd-hdb (or slapd-bdb). IIRC the guideline for idlcache on hdb is approx three times the cachesize (which you will have to decide on).
Bingo! Adding the idlcachesize made a world of difference, thanks! I didn't check that man page so never realised the index caching config directive had changed. I've followed the 3x rule and it's super-speedy now.
Thanks Buchan