: [IMail Forum] peering solution
I have about the same processing power, but I run a very hefty custom
Declude/Sniffer setup with two virus scanners, a full Web hosting
environment and am operating on RAID 5 with 4 active Cheetahs and double
the RAM. This server was optimized for reliability
1 HD, 2 partitions, c:=system win2k and d:=Imail data+spool
bad partition design. see list archives.
*- HD indexing service enabled.
turn it off
Drive C: fragmentation = 8%, D: fragmentation = 57%
disastrous
Len
_
Title: Message
Hi
all.
My server just can't
handle any more domains. Cpu load is over 90%.
I was going to
implement another independant server when I read something about peering servers
in the Imail K.B.
Does this solution
work OK in the real world? Are any of you guys using it? I mean,
My server just can't handle any more domains. Cpu load is over 90%.
It shouldn't be, unless you have an extremely high load (200,000+ of
E-mails/day) or are running an old server.
What is using up the high CPU time?
While peering or load balancing may be necessary, there is most likely
I still have a lot of doubts about this.
Some will say that you _should_ have a lot of doubt and should never
use peering. I know from experience that peering is fully appropriate
for a couple of situations, though in all other situations it will be
grossly wrong. If you don't know how
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: segunda-feira, 8 de março de 2004 13:43
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] peering solution
My server just can't handle any more domains. Cpu load is over 90%.
It shouldn't be, unless you have an extremely high load (200,000+ of
E-mails/day
Our server has the following caracteristics
PIII 1.13 ghz Dual processor
Imail average daily flow:
70,000 (4gb) messages in
20,000 (2gb)messages out
Top cpu consumers in consumption order.
1. Queue manager
2. SMTP
3. Webmessaging
Server only runs Imail, No external Anti-spam nor Anti-Virus.
Do you have large rules files for any of the domains?
Tripp
- Original Message -
From: Rudy Pieruccini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 3:57 PM
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] peering solution
HI Scott.
Our server has the following caracteristics
I have about the same processing power, but I run a very hefty custom
Declude/Sniffer setup with two virus scanners, a full Web hosting
environment and am operating on RAID 5 with 4 active Cheetahs and double
the RAM. This server was optimized for reliability and not speed, but
it could
HD 36gb scsi (Seagate st336706LW SCSI)
I would never try to push that traffic through a single, uncached
drive.
Take constant contention for the disk channel from multiple daemons
and threads, add in fragmentation, and you've got a recipe for high
CPU. It's not only distinctly
: Re: [IMail Forum] peering solution
Do you have large rules files for any of the domains?
Tripp
- Original Message -
From: Rudy Pieruccini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 3:57 PM
Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] peering solution
HI Scott.
Our server has
11 matches
Mail list logo
