Search Again: Re: Capacity & RAM From: Men & Mice Support Date: Friday, November 5, 1999 Time: 10:39:00 pm At 4:55 PM -0500 11/5/99, andrew kagan wrote: >> Disk cache is totally unrelated, except as it affects other processes >> (including virtual memory, if you're using it). QuickDNS Pro holds >> *everything* in memory. >> >I didn't mean as far as QDNS was concerned, per se...I meant that if you >were running a lot of other apps simultaneously, which did a lot of disk >intensive swapping, it might negatively affect overall CPU performance. Correct, of course. >> A zone transfer is sent as a series of query responses, specially >> formatted. Each record is sent individually, if you can believe it. >> And software does indeed affect upper limits - just compare MacDNS to >> QuickDNS Pro. > >Hey Chris...I'm on your side...I meant that QDNS wouldn't be the choke >point...the system would be. No offense intended, no offense taken. I wasn't put out by your response, just trying to clarify. In a sense, yes, the system is the choke point, not QDNS. But in another sense, they are the same, since what is important is the performance of QDNS on that system. >> The root servers have been very busy lately; many of them are >> becoming unuseable during peak load times. It's kind of a problem. >> >Tell us about it! Have you tried updating records at Network Solutions >recently?! Luckily, I haven't had to go through that in quite a while, but I get enough vicarious frustration reading the posts here and on WebSTAR-talk. However, NetSol isn't the same as the root servers, where they simply don't respond to DNS queries sometimes. >> If you have a decently fast server, you can load QDNS up on memory >> until it never runs out of free memory (as indicated in the status >> window). >> >Like you say, there's too much memory as well as too little...hosting 20 >domains is a lot different than 20K domains. For the guy with 20 domains, >25-meg for QDNS would more than likely slow down the software for the reason >you mentioned at the beginning of this post. No, since all of your domains are read into cache as well, it doesn't matter whether the entries in the hash table come from local files or cached answers. The only difference, of course, is how the TTL's are handled. The amount of memory that QDNS can handle before you get the slowdown Jerry mentioned is pretty much only dependent on the speed of your machine - that 6220 of his is an extreme example. Also, keep in mind that having extra memory available, if it isn't used for caching records, won't have any effect whatsoever on QDNS. ____________________________________________________________________ Chris Buxton cbuxton@menandmice.com Men & Mice http://www.menandmice.com Makers of: QuickDNS Pro

Messages In This Thread: Re: Capacity & RAM by Kurt Anderson on Nov 5, 1999 at 5:26:00 pm Re: Capacity & RAM by eric@micromaniac.com on Nov 5, 1999 at 5:47:00 pm Re: Capacity & RAM by Men & Mice Support on Nov 5, 1999 at 8:51:00 pm Re: Capacity & RAM by andrew kagan on Nov 5, 1999 at 9:55:00 pm Re: Capacity & RAM by Men & Mice Support on Nov 5, 1999 at 10:39:00 pm Re: Capacity & RAM by Peter Lalor on Nov 8, 1999 at 7:52:00 pm Re: Capacity & RAM by Jerry Pasker-Systems Admin. on Nov 8, 1999 at 8:14:00 pm Re: Capacity & RAM by Men & Mice Support on Nov 8, 1999 at 10:17:00 pm Re: Capacity & RAM by Peter Lalor on Nov 15, 1999 at 7:50:00 pm Re: Capacity & RAM by Men & Mice Support on Nov 15, 1999 at 10:26:00 pm