Calendar
|
May '12 | |||||
| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |||
Archives
Tag Cloud
#asterisk #voip aastra Active Directory AD ADAM Amanda asterisk Asterisk Benchmark Blog branding call centre callrecording Catalyst Clustering DBIC DBIx-Class debian Digium Directory Services Disaster Recovery Dojo eDirectory Encrypted Backups Enterprise Backups Enterprise Directory Fedora Fedora Directory Server Fedora DS FreeSWITCH freeswitch IAM Identity Management IDM IP Telephony Isode Jabber/XMPP JavaScript Kamailio ldap LDAP LDAP Replication LDAP Schema linux Linux M-Vault Microsoft Microsoft FUD MirrorMode MySQL NBD ofcom OID OpenDS OpenLDAP openldap OpenLDAP Newsletter OpenLDAP Quick Tips OpenSIPs OpenSIPS opensips open source Open Source Oracle Oracle Internet Directory PABX Perl pikatechnologies pikawarp PostgreSQL Quad-Core RDBMS Red Hat Replication Request Tracker Samba sip SIP SSO Sun Sun Microsystems SunOne suretec Suretec suretec telecom SureVoIP surevoip Symas Symas OpenLDAP Ubuntu UC UM Unified Communications VoIP voip X.500 XMPP yubico yubikey
Wednesday, January 16. 2008
Isode's M-Vault 14 versus OpenLDAP
Howard Chu from Symas and Chief Architect of OpenLDAP has just finished some interesting benchmarks of Isode's M-Vault 14 versus OpenLDAP:
But interestingly:
I recently tested Isode's M-Vault 14. For the most part there were no surprises, we were 5-6 times faster on the 1M entry DB. Load times were comparable, with OpenLDAP at around 3 minutes (as before) and Isode at around 4 minutes. While OpenLDAP delivered over 29,000 auths/sec using 8 cores, Isode delivered only 4600 auths/sec. (And there's still the interesting result that OpenLDAP delivered almost 31,000/sec using only 7 cores, leaving one core reserved for the ethernet driver.)
But interestingly:
But Steve Kille asked "how do they perform on a database much larger than the server memory, like 50 million entries?" and that yielded an unexpected result. For OpenLDAP 2.4.7, BDB 4.6.21, and back-hdb it took 11:27:40(hh:mm:ss) to slapadd the database, while it only took Isode 3:47:33 to bulk load. Naturally I was curious about why there was such a big difference. Unfortunately the Isode numbers were not repeatable; I was using XFS and the filesystem kept hanging on my subsequent rerun attempts.
After some of Howards special tweaking:
I found the final proof of this conclusion by tweaking slapadd to use DB_PRIVATE when creating the environment. This option just uses malloc for the BDB caches, instead of shared memory. I also ran with tcmalloc. This time the slapadd took only 3:04:21.
We think it's fair that Isode also update their Benchmarking M-Vault: Isode M-Vault vs. OpenLDAP page.
What we at Suretec love is the fact that Isode were so helpful and open about the whole process.
If only other vendors would be so open....
Suretec®
Posted by Suretec
in OpenLDAP
at
19:11
| Comments (0)
| Trackbacks (0)
Defined tags for this entry: IAM
, Identity Management
, Isode
, LDAP
, M-Vault
, OpenLDAP
, Sun
, Suretec
, Symas
, Identity Management, Isode, LDAP, M-Vault, OpenLDAP, Sun, Suretec, Symas
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Site Feeds
Quicksearch
Comments
Wed, 21.03.2012 11:47
Wed, 21.03.2012 10:50
Fri, 16.03.2012 10:37
Links
Categories
Powered by
