Thanks for the links. I just needed some figures so that I could show the other guys that the performance was way more than what we need.
I was pretty much sold on djbdns just on the fact that the domains reload a heck of a lot faster than they do on bind.
For the record, the stats were as follows:
Current Production Boxes
CPU: One Single and One Dual 400 Mhz Pentium II
Memory: 256 MB
Services running: rsync, sshd, named
OS: Linux 2.4.13 (custom kernel builds on both)
Hard Drives: IBM DDRS-39130D SCSI Drives (Mylex DAC960 controller and hardware RAID enabled)
Nameserver: Bind 8.x.x (latest patches)
My test box
CPU: Single CPU Pentium III Celeron 550 Mhz
Memory: 128 MB
Services running: Apache, MySQL, XFree86 4.0, Blackbox, sshd, vncserver, 2 copies of Emacs, Gimp, tinydns.
OS: FreeBSD 4.5-RELEASE-p4 (custom kernel build)
Hard Drive: Maxtor 52049U4 IDE drive
Nameserver: djbdns 1.05
Not quite the same hardware wise, but I figure that the production boxes had more RAM and fewer services running, so the odds should be evened out a little. Besides, my test box is just that ... a box for me to play around with
# of domains used: 131785 (basically our live configuration)
For both cases, perl programs were used to build the configuration file(s), which were then moved to the appropriate directories.
Time taken to reload named (running killall -HUP named
): 4.25 hours (approx)
Time taken to reload djbdns (running make
): 20 seconds (approx). Size of data.cdb = 139 MB
At this point, I was pretty much sold on djbdns