BerkeleyDB slower than tradindexed?

Jaye Mathisen mrcpu at
Mon Jul 31 05:37:49 UTC 2000

Was messing around with my test box on Thursday, and decided to drop
waaaay back to BerkeleyDB 2.7.7 (having already tried 3.x+ in the past
with abysmal results).

Now normally, I get around 126GB/day, with most of that coming from
Cidera, and BBN filling in the blanks.

I normally run with tradindexed for overview, on a 4 disk RAID 0 array.

So I wipe out the traditional index, compile with  Berkeley DB 2.7.7, 
bump the # of files to 128 in inn.conf (can't remember the setting, but
it's the one for the # of database files), and turn it loose...

About 6 hours later, I get a call from Skycache/Cidera, telling me I'm
dropping articles (about 1/4th to 1/3rd), and lo and behold, I only
processed about 95GB of news during the day...

Hmph...  Tried another day.  Same thing.  Hmph.  Switched back to
traditional.  Much better.

Here's the part that concerns me:

here's a log entry from the timer stats with BerkeleyDB:

overview write   08:14:15.967  34.9%     577645     0.000     51.339

36 seconds to write overview?!?!?!?!?

And a 51ms average?  Ouch.

What kind of numbers are other people seeing?  Outside of these numbers,
everything looks fine, there's lots of idletime, the box has plenty of
oomph left, low load average, CNFS buffers, and only 1 outbound feed, and
1 or 2 readers (usually me, testing).

traditional index was waaaaay better.  I don't have a report handy, but I
seem to recall it being a max of something like 4.5 seconds, and the
average was much lower.

I am using FreeBSD 4.0-stable.

I'm going to try buffindexed, but as I recall, the last time I used it, I
had problems, but can give 'er another shot.

My INN is -current from 7/28.

More information about the inn-workers mailing list