706 reputation
413
bio website
location
age
visits member for 4 years, 8 months
seen Jan 17 at 12:50

Nov
28
awarded  Constituent
Nov
24
awarded  Caucus
Nov
24
comment very long “connecting” in chrome using ipv6
Do you know if it's the DNS resolution, the first TCP handshake, or receiving the reply that is the problem?
Oct
30
comment MySQL 5.5 degraded performance in linux kernel 3.2 compared to 2.6
Oeh, interesting. Debian is still at 3.2 in stable, but I see some newer kernels in wheezy-backports, I'll check them out soon!
Aug
14
comment MySQL 5.5 degraded performance in linux kernel 3.2 compared to 2.6
Very interesting read, thank you, especially the linked article at mysql performance blog. I'll check out the file system here, seems they have data=ordered currently.
Jul
2
awarded  Curious
Mar
20
awarded  Popular Question
Feb
12
comment Can I get postfix to drop all mail meant for a specific MX?
Yes, indeed, which is what I was after, with DISCARD-ing them on the spot... It wouldn't be that much needed if those domain-parking dudes just refused the mail, but they refuse to listen to SMTP on their configured MX.
Feb
11
answered 404 returned though rewrite rule is matched
Feb
11
comment Can I get postfix to drop all mail meant for a specific MX?
Yes, I'm currently working with mailq/postsuper combo as a temporary measure, and this works ok-ish, but constantly scanning the queue with cron jobs is what I'd like to avoid. pfqueue seems as first glance to only be an interactive thing. which is nice to manually throw some away, but I'd very much keep it a hands-off kind of thing ;) Or am I mistaken reading the pfqueue man?
Feb
11
comment Can I get postfix to drop all mail meant for a specific MX?
Sure, let's say 2 hours, how can I add the rules for that MX (so, not for a domain, for specifically for a receiving MX)?
Feb
11
asked Can I get postfix to drop all mail meant for a specific MX?
Oct
27
awarded  Popular Question
Sep
10
comment MySQL 5.5 degraded performance in linux kernel 3.2 compared to 2.6
@Jure1873: hm, as I understand it, it's quite safe for battery backed disks, and who would go without in a serious database setup?
Aug
16
revised MySQL 5.5 degraded performance in linux kernel 3.2 compared to 2.6
added 179 characters in body
Aug
16
comment MySQL 5.5 degraded performance in linux kernel 3.2 compared to 2.6
Hm, currently investigating this SO answer
Aug
14
comment MySQL 5.5 degraded performance in linux kernel 3.2 compared to 2.6
That IS what we're doing. Same machine. 2 kernels installed. Boot in one vs. boot in the other results in this.
Aug
14
comment MySQL 5.5 degraded performance in linux kernel 3.2 compared to 2.6
Everything, as I said, the very same server, only with another kernel, is showing this behavior. I could imagine that the 'default' settings of a kernel wouldn't be ideal for the beast that is our DB machine, but it has never bothered us before...
Aug
14
revised MySQL 5.5 degraded performance in linux kernel 3.2 compared to 2.6
Minor typo/wording/omitted NOT's are important :P
Aug
14
accepted Postfix has stopped all forwarding