On Wed 1999-04-14 (12:18), Silver CHEN wrote:
> Dear Keith:
>
> I think you got my point, thanks.
>
> My experience on sendmail at this tpoic *is* quite good - sorry, I don't
> have such experience on qmail yet.
>
> My intuition tells me that the first way will be better, since it will send
> only one copy of messages on network. If I have a 30KB+ message size, and
> 400K subscribers, the first method 'seems' to be much more efficient than
> the second one.
>
> However, this is what I 'think' - no real world experience on qmail yet.
>
> I'll examine this behavior on qmail soon, the machine is still in the box,
> I don't have time to open/assamble/install it these days.
>
> Our newsletters have 'sponsors', and some information is time-intensive,
> so my life is harder and harder.... :(
>
> Anyway, thanks for any comment on this tpoic.
Please note that I only speculated that sendmail would be faster in this one
particular case. For pretty much any other scenario qmail is significantly
faster. I have noticed that using multiple-rcpt messages to one particular
host appeared to be faster than many single message individual smtp sessions,
but as my fellow list members have pointed out this does not necessarily mean
that this would always be the case.
If you're looking for speed, qmail is definitely the way to go. If all of
your 400K subscribers are on the same remote host then perhaps do some
profiling to see whether or not you'd gain by using multiple rcpt to's.
Otherwise IMHO don't bother. Just use qmail :-)
- Keith
> Silver CHEN
--
Keith Burdis - MSc (Com Sci) - Rhodes University, South Africa
Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW : http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~keith/
IRC : Panthras JAPH
"Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from a perl script"
Standard disclaimer.
---
