Hi Mike, Russ,
I really appreciate you took some time out to reply. Thanks.
Yes, I do have three of my production servers co-located with an ISP in the
US that promises unlimited bandwidth, with a 99.9% uptime. All these
production boxes have a SCSI Disk with hardware alarms to indicate any
malfunction, and 1 GB of RAM. I have a crude "load balancing" algorithm that
ensures the load is shared across these boxes.
We are running the alpha phase right now (with whatever current
implementations we have), and I have serious doubts about the stability and
scalability of the system. The maximum load that I've put on my production
boxes is 250,000 emails so far and I've had similar issues that I mentioned
on my development boxes (the ones that are resemble a Beetle, to quote Mike
:-) ).
Before I move anything to production, I test them on the local (Indian
servers). These issues appear at both places.
Thanks once again for your responses.
Manav.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Jackson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "manav" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 8:53 PM
Subject: Re: Java and Qmail - building a large mailmerge server - plain text
version
> manav wrote:
>
> > The objective is to build a high-volumer server capable of doing
mail-merged
> > email blasts to several lists with 10,000 to 1,000,000 users, provide
> > detailed reports about the status of emails (sent, bounced, bad email
> > addresses, opened, forwarded), list management (across multiple lists
for
> > each user) and of course, stability.
> >
> > Over the period of last 12 months, we explored several options - and
finally
> > settled on qmail (what else?). I am using a Pentium III with Linux
Redhat
> > 6.2 installed on it, with 512 MB of RAM, 20 GB HDD and JDK 1.2.2
connected
> > to a 128 Kbps line.
> >
>
> Before you go any further, get a real pipe. Why do people insist that
> their Volkswagen Beetle is capable of keeping up with a Ferrari on the
> autobahn? The volume of messages that you are trying to send is nothing
> short of ridiculous with a 128Kbps line.
>
> --
> Mike
