On 02/21/2013 11:11 AM, Patrick Raspante wrote:
I was mostly curious if the difference in cache configurations has any negative effect on the integrity of the replication agreement between the directory instances.

To illustrate, say one directory instance is managing several root suffixes and has increased cache settings. The other instance has default settings. The default instance is perfectly capable of operating on the replicated data-set and/or doesn't have the performance requirements of the other instance.

It depends where your requests are going.  If all of your servers have an equal request load, then it makes sense to have the same cache settings on all of your servers.

But I strongly encourage you to use the tool below to monitor your usage.  Depending on your platform, how much RAM you have, how many entries you have, etc.  you may need to decrease your cache settings to save RAM, or increase to cache more entries.  To emphasize what David Boreham said, if you can easily cache everything in RAM, in db cache and entry/dn caches, then that will give you the very best performance.  Otherwise, better to let the OS file system cache work for you.


Thanks,
Patrick

On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Rich Megginson <rmeggins@redhat.com> wrote:
On 02/21/2013 08:27 AM, Patrick Raspante wrote:
Is it required (or at least suggested) that multi-mastered directory server instances have the equal values for dbcache and entry cache settings? If so, what adverse effects result from not configuring the caches similarly?

There is a tool which you can use to monitor the caches:

https://github.com/richm/scripts/wiki/dbmon.sh
https://github.com/richm/scripts/blob/master/dbmon.sh


Thanks,
pwr