Re: POP3 && sticky bit, IMHO
On Sat, Mar 25, 2000 at 06:42:52AM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote: > IMHO, qmail-pop3 should deny access to a Maildir if the home directory > it is stored in has the sticky bit set. It's consistent with > qmail-local, which will refuse to deliver mail to such a home > directory. I know, I know: No it's not consistent. The reason qmail-local doesn't deliver when the sticky bit is set, is that you might be in the process of writing out a new .qmail-file. Doing .qmail-updates atomically removes the need for sticky-bitness. Since pop3 operations are atomic (in the updates they do anyway), and there is no configfile for pop3 in the homedir, I disagree. Greetz, Peter. -- Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder | | 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; | C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.' | Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
unsubscribe qmail
Re: Running qmail on a 4x Xeon 550MHz system
On Sat, Mar 25, 2000 at 01:47:41PM +0100, Andreas Aardal Hanssen wrote: > Hello, > > I'm currently administrating the mail delivery system on a > system as described in the subject, with 1GB of SDRAM and > 100GB disk. > > I'm using ReiserFS (which, BTW, is working very well). My > mailsystem receives 70'000 mails a day and the throughput > is just about twice that. Average mails sent per second > varies around 70-170 mails. Uhm.. with 86400 seconds to a day, your average throughpout should be about 2mails/sec. What you are stating here is impossible. Greetz, Peter. -- Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder | | 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; | C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.' | Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
Re: Avoiding qmail being listed on ORBS
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 09:57:10AM +0200, Ruben van der Leij wrote: > On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 12:43:01AM -0600, iv0 wrote: > > > Probably a petition to the orbs site by qmail admins to tell them > > to make a factual test. > > Orbs does test. It tries to relay a message back to itself. If that message > gets back, the box it tested is an open relay. and _only_ then. > The situation where open relays are not marked as such because they are > using some specific mailer is highly unwanted. See how you react to the > following statement: That is something else. You are now considering the case where a box that _is_ an open relay is _not_ listed in ORBS. > > Probably a petition to the orbs site by M$ Exchange admins to tell them > > to make a factual test. > > The debate wether or not relay-testing is good is not one for this list. But > suggesting that relay-tests should be adapted to fit the most common > configuration-errors of qmail is the wrong solution to the problem. I think you are missing the point here, my dear friend.. Greetz, Peter. -- Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder | | 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; | C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.' | Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
Re: Adding X-Deliver-To Header for Virtual Domains
Hi, They must be a easy way to do this, moving to something like vpopmail would probably cause more problems. I've tried it before and they was very little documentation. Thanks, Chris At 07:53 AM 24/03/2000 -0600, iv0 wrote: >Chris Bond wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > How can I add a header X-Deliver-To that has final destination of the > > email. The reason I need to do this is because the To or CC header is not > > enough information for a program to deliver the mail correctly. > > > > The domain in question I need to do this with is a "Virtual Domain" setup > > in qmail. To some extent this already exists in the header Delivered-To, > > the only problem is it looks like the following: > > > > Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > If you can remove the virtual username and dash and put this into the > > X-Deliver-To header this would slove the problem in a stroke. > > > > Thanks, > > Chris > >We've done that with the development version of vpopmail 3.4.12. >Instead of a header that has: virtualdomain-user@virtualdomain >It puts user@virtualdomain > >Ken Jones >http://www.inter7.com/vpopmail/
Canonical Domains mail Error
Hi this is to request help on canonical domain names setup for mail. i have a client for whom we ahve setup canonical names for their branch offices. the problem is that when a mail is send to a canonical doamin email id the mail goes and resides into the main pop account of the domain. for ex. === 1) i have a domain abc.com 2) i have setup four canonical domains i.e. branch1.abc.com, branch2.abc.com, branch3.abc.com & branch4.abc.com 3) when mails are sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] & [EMAIL PROTECTED] the latter goes and resides in the main pop account of the domain abc.com i.e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] whereas the earlier goes and resides properly in the [EMAIL PROTECTED] pop account. 4) I have the same setup for all the four canonical names in the virtualdomains file and the rcpthosts file as well as the aliases file. somebody please mail a solution at the very earliest. - Admin. --- Parag Mehta<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> System Administrator.
Serialmail/Turnmail
Hi, I've just come across the turnmail on the qmail web site - it looks like exactly like what I need. I've compiled serialmail and installed it properly. I've tried quite a few things to get the script working but none of them seem to work. I'm starting pop3d at the moment with: /usr/bin/tcpserver 0 110 /usr/sbin/qmail-popup chef.praceng.co.uk /usr/bin/checkpassword /usr/sbin/qmail-pop3d Maildir & I've copied the contents to /usr/sbin/turnmail and tried the following line but no luck: /usr/bin/tcpserver 0 110 /usr/sbin/qmail-popup chef.praceng.co.uk /usr/bin/checkpassword /usr/sbin/autoturn & Any ideas or tips how to get this working as its really bugging me! I've copied the contents of the autoturn and pasted them below as I had to remove one ; for the script to work. #!/bin/sh if [ -d Maildirdummy ]; then /usr/bin/maildirsmtp $1 $USER- $TCPREMOTEIP `hostname` 2>&1 | logger -p daemon.notice & /usr/sbin/qmail-pop3d Maildirdummy fi exec /usr/sbin/qmail-pop3d $1 Can anyone help me or gives me some tips to getting it too work? Thanks, Chris
Re: Where is setuser ?
At 07:03 27/03/2000 +0200, Magnus Bodin wrote: >On Fri, Mar 24, 2000 at 12:31:02AM -0700, Irwan Hadi wrote: >> >> ulimit -v 2048 >> >> csh -cf '/var/qmail/rc &' >> >> supervise /var/lock/qmail-smtpd tcpserver -v -x/etc/tcp.smtp.cdb >> -u$USERID -g$GROUPID 0 25 \ >> rblsmtpd qmail-smtpd 2>&1 | setuser qmaill accustamp | \ >> setuser qmaill cyclog -s500 -n5 /var/log/qmail/qmail-smtpd & >> >> I want to run this script from my init >> My question is, where could I found "setuser" command ? because W/O this, >> the script won't work, and I must do manually the command. > >You are probably using daemontools 0.61. The script snippet above is written >for daemontools 0.53. > >There were a few name changes of programs between these versions, and >therefore it will be hard to reuse the snippet above without modification. >"setuser" has been replaced by "setuidgid", "cyclog" has been replaced by >"multilog", et c. So to make it easy, could I just change all setuser command with setuidgid all cyclog command with multilog etc ? like this below >> setuidgid qmaill multilog -s500 -n5 /var/log/qmail/qmail-smtpd & --- AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
qmail Digest 27 Mar 2000 11:00:00 -0000 Issue 953
qmail Digest 27 Mar 2000 11:00:00 - Issue 953 Topics (messages 39078 through 39109): Majordomo with qmail 39078 by: Hong Taeki unsubscribe qmail 39079 by: Rich Ferguson 39080 by: Anthony Diaz 39103 by: Jankok, L. (dsc-pm) Re: What is the maximal value 39081 by: Charles Cazabon QmailAnaLog 39082 by: S.P. Hoeke Re: Another (slightly different) cr lf question 39083 by: Bob Rogers Re: Running qmail on a 4x Xeon 550MHz system 39084 by: Racer X 39085 by: Racer X 39104 by: Peter van Dijk cannot get qmail to compile on Solaris 39086 by: Martin Searancke error 421 39087 by: Mike Alexander Sauvain 39088 by: Chris Johnson Qmail-pop3d 39089 by: em9652015 39090 by: Chris Johnson 39091 by: em9652015 39092 by: Ronny Haryanto 39093 by: em9652015 39094 by: em9652015 Wrap & Maildir 39095 by: Mike Alexander Sauvain Re: Where is setuser ? 39096 by: Magnus Bodin 39109 by: Irwan Hadi Avoiding qmail being listed on ORBS 39097 by: Kristina 39098 by: iv0 39099 by: Adam McKenna 39101 by: Ruben van der Leij 39105 by: Peter van Dijk TCPServer and relaying... 39100 by: Häffelin Holger Re: POP3 && sticky bit, IMHO 39102 by: Peter van Dijk Re: Adding X-Deliver-To Header for Virtual Domains 39106 by: Chris Bond Canonical Domains mail Error 39107 by: System Administrator Serialmail/Turnmail 39108 by: Chris Bond Administrivia: To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to the digest, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To bug my human owner, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To post to the list, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Hi, I am a Redhat linux 6.1 user. I want to use majordomo with qmail. But I cannot find good instrucions or patches. Where can I find them? Thank you... __ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com Irwan Hadi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I want to know, what is the maximal value of > concurrencyremote and concurrencylocal W/O recompiling again the qmail/kernel 120 if I remember correctly. > What is the ideal value of concurrencyremote with about 500 mails outbound > everyday, and 800 mails inbound. If you mean 500 individual remote deliveries, the default (20?) is more than ample. However, 500 outbound emails with 1000 recipients each would be a different story. Look at the output of zoverall (from qmailanalog). That will give you some statistics, such as average concurrency, etc. I'm guessing yours will be much less than 1. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. --- Hi all, I'm a newbie to Qmail and OpenBSD and i was wondering if there's a FAQ or something about QmailAnaLog cause the documentation provided is, unfortunately, not enough for a newbie like me :-( Thanks, Steffan From: Uwe Ohse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 13:21:42 +0100 On Fri, Mar 24, 2000 at 04:47:18PM -0800, thomas wrote: > We have IMAP clients accessing these files directly off the unix box, > and they miss the cr Hm - strange. Question to the knowing: aren't IMPA servers supposed to translate the local line end conventions to CR/LF before sending the articles over the wire? Regards, Uwe It shouldn't be possible to do it any other way; no sane client or server should be willing/able to mess with the TCP line-end convention. Perhaps the original poster meant the following: We have MUAs [which are also IMAP clients] that access these files directly off the unix box [using file access], . . . Doesn't seem likely, but the original statement struck me as somewhat ambiguous . . . -- Bob Rogers if i may jump in... the load average is the average number of processes in a runnable state. it says nothing about how much cpu time is actually being used. for instance, i run a very busy internet site (6+ million hits/day) on a p2-300 running freebsd 4.0. the load is always up around 5 or 6, sometimes closer to 8 or 9, because there are always 300-400 apache processes running. however, top reports that the processor is idle about 30% of the time. bottom line is that top doesn't mean anything about how busy the cpu is. it's strictly a snapshot measure of how many processes are in a runnable state (not slee
Re: Canonical Domains mail Error
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 02:34:00PM +0530, System Administrator wrote: > Hi > > this is to request help on canonical domain names setup for mail. > > i have a client for whom we ahve setup canonical names for their branch > offices. the problem is that when a mail is send to a canonical doamin > email id the mail goes and resides into the main pop account of the > domain. > > for ex. > === > 1) i have a domain abc.com > 2) i have setup four canonical domains i.e. branch1.abc.com, > branch2.abc.com, branch3.abc.com & branch4.abc.com Change them to A records. So instead of: abc.com IN A 1.2.3.4 branch1.abc.com IN CNAME abc.com do this: abc.com IN A 1.2.3.4 branch1.abc.com IN A 1.2.3.4 Chris
another users/assign file question
> I'm using qmail / vpopmail both latest versions. > > I've set up my users/assign file to look like this. > > +bbb.com-:bbb.com:1007:7004:/export/home/vpopmail/domains/bbb.com:-:: > +aaa.com-:aaa.com:1007:7004:/export/home/vpopmail/domains/bbb.com:-:: > . > > Basically I want all mail coming in addressed to aaa.com to go to the > bbb.com domain > aaa.com has an MX record pointing to bbb.com > > The way I read the man page relating to the assign file was anything > coming in to aaa.com will be delivered to wherever I tell it the mailbox > is in the assign file. > > when I send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] it should go to > /export/home/vpopmail/domains/bbb.com where brad's home mail directory > exists, but the error message is error: > Sorry,_no_mailbox_here_by_that_name._(#5.1.1)/ > > and yes I did run qmail-newu after editing the assign file. > > Any thoughts?
re : qmail / ldap mailing list
Hi there Could somone please tell me the qmail-ldap mailing list subscribe address as the archives have x'd out the address. -- Shaun Gibson Associate Unix and NT System Adminstrator Tel : +27-11-2667800 ext 8023 Intekom, Midrand, South Africa ---
/var/qmail/control
My mail server has several names... There is the name that is in the HOSTNAME file and there are the names assoaited to it in my DNS. the hostname is tar-valon.pds2k.com other names in the dns are... mail.pds2k.com www.pds2k.com ftp.pds2k.com Should I put the mail.pds2k.com in the ' me ' & ' locals ' files? TIA Christopher Tarricone PDS, Inc. E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone860.450.1737 fax 860.450.1724 * pds2k.com ...Business Internet Hookability with an Attitude... We Rock the Net!
Closing: Running qmail on a 4x Xeon 550MHz system
>> I'm using ReiserFS (which, BTW, is working very well). My >> mailsystem receives 70'000 mails a day and the throughput >> is just about twice that. Average mails sent per second >> varies around 70-170 mails. > Uhm.. with 86400 seconds to a day, your average throughpout should be > about 2mails/sec. > What you are stating here is impossible. Or a typo, perhaps. Thank you for making a good point in this discussion. It should be 'per minute', as everyone else seems to have understood. --- Closing up this discussion: The problem was: How can I make qmail deliver more mails per day, how to increase to flow of mails, considering that a computer has 1.4 in 15-minute uptime load on average mid-day. Currently the system does actually use our own mail delivery program (the magic '|' option in dot-qmail). This, ofcouse, serves our purpose much better than the /Maildir system or LDAP databases. It seems I might have solved our problem by removing the unneccesary qmail-local from the delivery system, so that qmail-lspawn spawns my delivery program directly. I also removed some unnessecary fsync()s as they were slowing down everything very much. It also seems that Linux's ulimit on processes-per-child has been a problem. Burst mailing causes serialization because Linux won't spawn child processes. That too is no problem anymore. IO is obviously the problem here, not how-to-interpret-that damn-uptime-load. To everyone making 'points' about typos and misinterprets: please stick to the question, don't harass the one posting. All I want is someone's opinion on a technical problem, not 14-year-olds quarreling. Thank's for all your postings, especially to Adam McKenna. Andreas (visit one of the world's larger qmail-based mail systems at http://NamePlanet.com). :) -- Andreas Aardal Hanssen (Live on SMTP) Software Developer (mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Closing: Running qmail on a 4x Xeon 550MHz system
Andreas Aardal Hanssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ...I also removed some unnessecary fsync()s as they were > slowing down everything very much... Be careful; if you mean that you've removed fsync()s from Dan's code, then you have definitely thrown away reliability in order to gain throughput. In your application, is it acceptable for emails to be silently lost under a power failure? Where did you get the idea that they were "unneccesary"? BTW you could get the same result--indeed, better results--without tampering with Dan's code, if you simply add memory and mount a ramdisk on /var/qmail/queue. If that revolts you, then you might want to put the fsync()s back. > ..IO is obviously the problem here, not how-to-interpret-that > damn-uptime-load... Correct. But Dan is not stupid; when he accepted the I/O cost, it was to gain a benefit. Before you refuse the cost, you should be sure you know what the benefit was--and that it doesn't outweigh the cost. Len. -- This has nothing to do with qmail or with trademarks. Someone could distribute patches for sendmail that relabel it as ``Dan Bernstein's mailer---yell at [EMAIL PROTECTED] when your system is broken into.'' -- Dan Bernstein, author of qmail
Problem with sending mail to virtual domain
I was asked to administer a site of a organization, and the homepage of the organization is already running (Www.site.or.id) The organization site now is hosted at an ISP. Now the organization want to have their own server (Server colocation) and no longer use the ISP space. The ISP only gave one IP address for the organization, and with that one IP, I should make a web mail service for about 25 sub domains. At the server, I use qmail, ucspi, qmailadmin, vpopmail, ezmlm, and other qmail tools. Actually I've made a DNS record to add to the ISP's dns record, because we still not permitted to run our DNS service, although I've setup the DNS, and only need to enter the record and run ndc start the DNS record is below (not with real IP) server A 192.168.1.1 MX 10 server MX 20 my.isp.mail.service staff CNAME server MX 10 server MX 20 my.isp.mail.service sma CNAME server MX 10 server MX 20 my.isp.mail.service smp CNAME server MX 10 server MX 20 my.isp.mail.service and so on, until 25 sub domains But this morning the administrator of the ISP, just added like this server A 192.168.1.1 MX 10 server MX 20 my.isp.mail.service staff CNAME server sma CNAME server smp CNAME server to his server. Okay, the site now could be accessed by it's domain name (http://server.site.or.id), but if someone called joe with his account [EMAIL PROTECTED] want to send email to me (@iname.com), then I will received his email, but his return address will be [EMAIL PROTECTED] If I want to send email to joe, using my ISP SMTP, then after the email arrived at server.site.or.id, the email will be bounced back, because the email when arrived at server.site, would be changed it's to address from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Now my question is how to fix this ? Is by adding MX record to the DNS record will solve the problem ? Beside that, how to use qmail-pop3d to fetch mail from virtualdomain account ? I run it under tcpserver. --- AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
Re: Closing: Running qmail on a 4x Xeon 550MHz system
>> ...I also removed some unnessecary fsync()s as they were >> slowing down everything very much... > Be careful; if you mean that you've removed fsync()s from Dan's code, > then you have definitely thrown away reliability in order to gain > throughput. In your application, is it acceptable for emails to be > silently lost under a power failure? Where did you get the idea that > they were "unneccesary"? > BTW you could get the same result--indeed, better results--without > tampering with Dan's code, if you simply add memory and mount a > ramdisk on /var/qmail/queue. > If that revolts you, then you might want to put the fsync()s back. >> ..IO is obviously the problem here, not how-to-interpret-that >> damn-uptime-load... > Correct. But Dan is not stupid; when he accepted the I/O cost, it was > to gain a benefit. Before you refuse the cost, you should be sure you > know what the benefit was--and that it doesn't outweigh the cost. Ok firstly, Who said I removed fsync()s from Dan's code? Please read my closing and see if I've said that. You see, you're really taking words out of my mouth. What I said was that I removed unnessesary fsync()s. From *MY* code, that is. I used two fsync()s before every close, just to reassure that we wouldn't get any NFS problems. Now, we aren't ever going to run NFS, so I removed *one* fsync per file-close and wrote it as a 'fdatasync'. Our RAID-7 controller is mounted with write-through cache and so the loss of mails equals ZIP. First, you complain about my where-did-you-get-that-from removing of Dan Bernstein's fsync()s, then you advise me to mount my queue-directory on a *ramdisk* That means, if the power dies and the UPS short-circuits, all the mail in the queue will be lost! Andreas
Re: Problem with sending mail to virtual domain
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 07:18:48PM -0700, Irwan Hadi wrote: > I was asked to administer a site of a organization, and the homepage of the > organization is already running (Www.site.or.id) > The organization site now is hosted at an ISP. > Now the organization want to have their own server (Server colocation) and > no longer use the ISP space. > > The ISP only gave one IP address for the organization, and with that one > IP, I should make a web mail service for about 25 sub domains. > > At the server, I use qmail, ucspi, qmailadmin, vpopmail, ezmlm, and other > qmail tools. > Actually I've made a DNS record to add to the ISP's dns record, because we > still not permitted to run our DNS service, although I've setup the DNS, > and only need to enter the record and run ndc start > the DNS record is below (not with real IP) > > server A 192.168.1.1 > MX 10 server > MX 20 my.isp.mail.service > staff CNAME server > MX 10 server > MX 20 my.isp.mail.service Change it to this: staff A 192.168.1.1 MX 10 server MX 20 my.isp.mail.service Chris
[ncruz@isel.pt: Local Procmail ("+" feature)]
Originally posted to the vchkpw list, thought someone here might know what he's talking about. Ben -- "There is no spoon" -- The Matrix Sorry for the offtopic message... But does anyone know how can i setup qmail to support the user+something@domain feature of sendmail??? thanks Nuno Cruz
Re: Problem with sending mail to virtual domain
At 09:29 27/03/2000 -0500, Chris Johnson wrote: >On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 07:18:48PM -0700, Irwan Hadi wrote: >Change it to this: > >staff A 192.168.1.1 > MX 10 server > MX 20 my.isp.mail.service > Thanks for your answer, but, is it okay to have multiple A address which point to the same IP address ? --- AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
Re: Qmail-pop3d
On 27-Mar-2000, em9652015 wrote: > Mar 27 10:55:40 qmail qmail: 954129340.999824 delivery 12: deferral: >/bin/sh:_dot-forward:_command_not_found/ There's your answer. Install dot-forward. Ronny
Re: Problem with sending mail to virtual domain
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 07:38:28PM -0700, Irwan Hadi wrote: > At 09:29 27/03/2000 -0500, Chris Johnson wrote: > >On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 07:18:48PM -0700, Irwan Hadi wrote: > >Change it to this: > > > >staff A 192.168.1.1 > > MX 10 server > > MX 20 my.isp.mail.service > > > Thanks for your answer, but, is it okay to have multiple A address which > point to the same IP address ? It's absolutely okay, and it's required if you want your mail setup to work. It had better be okay, because you can't stop someone from pointing a name in his domain at one of your addresses. Chris
Re: Problem with sending mail to virtual domain
Yes, we do it all the time. On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Irwan Hadi wrote: > At 09:29 27/03/2000 -0500, Chris Johnson wrote: > >On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 07:18:48PM -0700, Irwan Hadi wrote: > >Change it to this: > > > >staff A 192.168.1.1 > > MX 10 server > > MX 20 my.isp.mail.service > > > Thanks for your answer, but, is it okay to have multiple A address which > point to the same IP address ? > > --- > AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024) > - Timothy L. Mayo mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Administrator localconnect(sm) http://www.localconnect.net/ The National Business Network Inc. http://www.nb.net/ One Monroeville Center, Suite 850 Monroeville, PA 15146 (412) 810- Phone (412) 810-8886 Fax
Re: TCPServer and relaying...
>2000-03-24 23:35:41.630688500 tcpserver: ok 24865 >lake.erche.de:195.245.48.3:25 >153.136.hh1.ip.foni.net:212.7.136.153::1373 > ># cat /etc/tcp.smtp >127.0.0.1:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" >195.245.48.:allow,RELAYCLIENT="" Your entry will allow the complete class -c subnet of 195.245.48 (195.245.48.0-195.245.48.255) to relay through your server. Is there somewhere a typo or wich host will be allowed to relay from the mentioned subnet? This host should be added like the other hosts at the end of your /etc/tcp.smtp. - Roland
Re: Closing: Running qmail on a 4x Xeon 550MHz system
Andreas Aardal Hanssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Who said I removed fsync()s from Dan's code? Please read my > closing and see if I've said that. You see, you're really > taking words out of my mouth. Just FYI, the correct expression is ``putting words into my mouth'', and I didn't do that. You did notice the ``if'', I trust? All the rest of my remarks were predicated on the conditional: > > Be careful; _IF_ you mean that you've removed fsync()s from Dan's > > code, then you have definitely thrown away reliability in order to > > gain throughput. I'm glad you solved your problem. I am somewhat surprised, though: if you call fsync() twice in a row, I would think that the second one would not do anything. The kernel knows that the file has been flushed, and wouldn't bother to do it again, would it? However, profiling doesn't lie--if you've seen performance improve, then you've improved performance. :) Len. -- This is one of many serious bugs in the Solaris ucb libraries. Do not use /usr/ucb/cc. One way to prevent mistakes is to move /usr/ucbinclude to /usr/ucbinclude-broken. -- Dan Bernstein
Re: Closing: Running qmail on a 4x Xeon 550MHz system
> > First, you complain about my where-did-you-get-that-from removing > of Dan Bernstein's fsync()s, then you advise me to mount my > queue-directory on a *ramdisk* > > That means, if the power dies and the UPS short-circuits, all > the mail in the queue will be lost! It was a turn of phrase -- he meant that IF you were removing the fsync() from Dan's code, you might as well put your queue on a RAM disk, since the results would be the same. -Stephen-
Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
Good day. We're running Qmail as a mainline ISP mailserver. Here's a few stats... 420,000 Email on the server. 27 Gig of disk space used for that Email. 66,000 local mailboxes. 300,000 Email delivered to local users/day. 200,000 Email delivered to remote sites/day. 600,000 POP mail accesses/day. 750 Virtual domains hosted on the server. 17,000 Mapping for those virtual domains. The box is an Ultra enterprise 450 with dual 330Mhz Ultrasparc II processors and an A1000 RAID array. Now, this poor box during the day is running with a load between 10 and 20 and goes down to around 2 or 3 late at night. Normally it keeps up pretty good, but when there's heavy spamming it can start to get behind with between 10,000 and 20,000 Email in the queue. (there's never less than 1000 in the queue, waiting for remote delivery) The queue has to be cleaned very regularrly as Mailer Daemon email builds up in the queue at a rate of over 1000 per day.(all undeliverable) Now, the question is. What to do to get the poor box under control. I don't think it's CPU related but more IO problems. Anyone else running this large a Qmail instalation? I'm about to call Sun and ask them to make it better, but I'm not sure they'll be able to recommend much either. Greg
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
You need to tell us additional facts about the server that are relevant to the question. Eg, Is /var/qmail/queue on a separate partition? What are the iostats like on each of the spindles? How are you running qmail-smtpd? what are your concurrency settings? What pop server are you using? Are the 66K mailboxes in user home directories all in /home? What does qmail-qstat show? Regards. On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 10:53:27AM -0600, Greg Moeller wrote: > Good day. > We're running Qmail as a mainline ISP mailserver. > Here's a few stats... > 420,000 Email on the server. > 27 Gig of disk space used for that Email. > 66,000 local mailboxes. > 300,000 Email delivered to local users/day. > 200,000 Email delivered to remote sites/day. > 600,000 POP mail accesses/day. > 750 Virtual domains hosted on the server. > 17,000 Mapping for those virtual domains. > > The box is an Ultra enterprise 450 with dual 330Mhz Ultrasparc II processors > and an A1000 RAID array. > > Now, this poor box during the day is running with a load between 10 and 20 > and goes down to around 2 or 3 late at night. > > Normally it keeps up pretty good, but when there's heavy spamming it can start > to get behind with between 10,000 and 20,000 Email in the queue. (there's > never less than 1000 in the queue, waiting for remote delivery) > The queue has to be cleaned very regularrly as Mailer Daemon email builds up > in the queue at a rate of over 1000 per day.(all undeliverable) > > Now, the question is. What to do to get the poor box under control. I don't > think it's CPU related but more IO problems. > > Anyone else running this large a Qmail instalation? > > I'm about to call Sun and ask them to make it better, but I'm not sure they'll > be able to recommend much either. > > Greg > >
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
I'm averaging 120,000+ emails (mostly mailing lists) a day on just an Ultra 10 333Mhz, 512MB Ram, and IDE HD's, and it rarely shows more than 1-2% utilization, so, I'm not sure that helps, but maybe it gives you some reference point to go on. It certainly seems your setup should be running far lower on utilization. Are you running it in inetd? or tcpserver? (etc). -Hawke Greg Moeller wrote: > > Good day. > We're running Qmail as a mainline ISP mailserver. > Here's a few stats... > 420,000 Email on the server. > 27 Gig of disk space used for that Email. > 66,000 local mailboxes. > 300,000 Email delivered to local users/day. > 200,000 Email delivered to remote sites/day. > 600,000 POP mail accesses/day. > 750 Virtual domains hosted on the server. > 17,000 Mapping for those virtual domains. > > The box is an Ultra enterprise 450 with dual 330Mhz Ultrasparc II processors > and an A1000 RAID array. > > Now, this poor box during the day is running with a load between 10 and 20 > and goes down to around 2 or 3 late at night. > > Normally it keeps up pretty good, but when there's heavy spamming it can start > to get behind with between 10,000 and 20,000 Email in the queue. (there's > never less than 1000 in the queue, waiting for remote delivery) > The queue has to be cleaned very regularrly as Mailer Daemon email builds up > in the queue at a rate of over 1000 per day.(all undeliverable) > > Now, the question is. What to do to get the poor box under control. I don't > think it's CPU related but more IO problems. > > Anyone else running this large a Qmail instalation? > > I'm about to call Sun and ask them to make it better, but I'm not sure they'll > be able to recommend much either. > > Greg -- -Hawke eSystems Architect for Franklin Covey E-solutions. Independent Java Developer, Webmaster, Photographer, & Multimedia designer. The statements included are solely based on my own opinion, and in no way reflects any position or approval by my employer.
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 10:14:15AM -0700, H wrote: > I'm averaging 120,000+ emails (mostly mailing lists) a day on just an > Ultra 10 333Mhz, 512MB Ram, and IDE HD's, and it rarely shows more than > 1-2% utilization, so, I'm not sure that helps, but maybe it gives you > some reference point to go on. It certainly seems your setup should be > running far lower on utilization. Are you running it in inetd? or > tcpserver? (etc). One thing to note is that inbound mail typically consumes a *lot* more system resources than outbound, especially if the outbound is mailing lists managed by something qmail-friendly, like ezmlm. Regards. > -Hawke > > Greg Moeller wrote: > > > > Good day. > > We're running Qmail as a mainline ISP mailserver. > > Here's a few stats... > > 420,000 Email on the server. > > 27 Gig of disk space used for that Email. > > 66,000 local mailboxes. > > 300,000 Email delivered to local users/day. > > 200,000 Email delivered to remote sites/day. > > 600,000 POP mail accesses/day. > > 750 Virtual domains hosted on the server. > > 17,000 Mapping for those virtual domains. > > > > The box is an Ultra enterprise 450 with dual 330Mhz Ultrasparc II processors > > and an A1000 RAID array. > > > > Now, this poor box during the day is running with a load between 10 and 20
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
Very true, and it is. -Hawke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 10:14:15AM -0700, H wrote: > > I'm averaging 120,000+ emails (mostly mailing lists) a day on just an > > Ultra 10 333Mhz, 512MB Ram, and IDE HD's, and it rarely shows more than > > 1-2% utilization, so, I'm not sure that helps, but maybe it gives you > > some reference point to go on. It certainly seems your setup should be > > running far lower on utilization. Are you running it in inetd? or > > tcpserver? (etc). > > One thing to note is that inbound mail typically consumes a *lot* more system > resources than outbound, especially if the outbound is mailing lists managed > by something qmail-friendly, like ezmlm. > > Regards. > > > -Hawke > > > > Greg Moeller wrote: > > > > > > Good day. > > > We're running Qmail as a mainline ISP mailserver. > > > Here's a few stats... > > > 420,000 Email on the server. > > > 27 Gig of disk space used for that Email. > > > 66,000 local mailboxes. > > > 300,000 Email delivered to local users/day. > > > 200,000 Email delivered to remote sites/day. > > > 600,000 POP mail accesses/day. > > > 750 Virtual domains hosted on the server. > > > 17,000 Mapping for those virtual domains. > > > > > > The box is an Ultra enterprise 450 with dual 330Mhz Ultrasparc II processors > > > and an A1000 RAID array. > > > > > > Now, this poor box during the day is running with a load between 10 and 20 -- -Hawke eSystems Architect for Franklin Covey E-solutions. Independent Java Developer, Webmaster, Photographer, & Multimedia designer. The statements included are solely based on my own opinion, and in no way reflects any position or approval by my employer.
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
How much cache ram on that RAID array. 256MB would be a good start. -jim
Qmail + LDAP problems
Hello,
I am running Qmail 1.03 with the LDAP patch from http://www.nrg4u.com
on a Solaris 2.6 box. LDAP is OpenLDAP 1.2.9 residing on the same
box.
The patch applies cleanly to the source, and I'm able to compile qmail
successfully. However, when I try to start qmail, I get:
bash-2.02# /var/qmail/rc
alert: cannot start: hath the daemon spawn no fire?
bash-2.02# cat /var/qmail/rc
#!/bin/sh
# Using stdout for logging
# Using control/defaultdelivery from qmail-local to deliver messages
by default
exec env - PATH="/var/qmail/bin:$PATH" \
qmail-start "`cat /var/qmail/control/defaultdelivery`"
bash-2.02# cat /var/qmail/control/defaultdelivery
./Maildir
bash-2.02# truss /var/qmail/rc
execve("/var/qmail/rc", 0xED10, 0xED18) argc = 2
open("/dev/zero", O_RDONLY) = 3
mmap(0x, 8192, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE|PROT_EXEC, MAP_PRIVATE, 3,
0) = 0xEF7B
open("/usr/lib/libc.so.1", O_RDONLY)= 4
fstat(4, 0xE8A4)= 0
mmap(0x, 8192, PROT_READ|PROT_EXEC, MAP_PRIVATE, 4, 0) =
0xEF7A
mmap(0x, 704512, PROT_READ|PROT_EXEC, MAP_PRIVATE, 4, 0) =
0xEF68
munmap(0xEF714000, 57344) = 0
mmap(0xEF722000, 28432, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE|PROT_EXEC,
MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_FIXED, 4, 598016) = 0xEF722000
mmap(0xEF72A000, 2592, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE|PROT_EXEC,
MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_FIXED, 3, 0) = 0xEF72A000
close(4)= 0
open("/usr/lib/libdl.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 4
fstat(4, 0xE8A4)= 0
mmap(0xEF7A, 8192, PROT_READ|PROT_EXEC, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_FIXED, 4,
0) = 0xEF7A
close(4)= 0
open("/usr/platform/SUNW,Ultra-5_10/lib/libc_psr.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 4
fstat(4, 0xE684)= 0
mmap(0x, 8192, PROT_READ|PROT_EXEC, MAP_PRIVATE, 4, 0) =
0xEF79
mmap(0x, 16384, PROT_READ|PROT_EXEC, MAP_PRIVATE, 4, 0) =
0xEF78
close(4)= 0
close(3)= 0
munmap(0xEF79, 8192)= 0
getpid()= 9915 [9914]
getpgid(9915) = 9914
getsid(9915)= 338
brk(0x000384B8) = 0
sysconfig(_CONFIG_SIGRT_MIN)= 38
sysconfig(_CONFIG_SIGRT_MAX)= 45
sigaltstack(0xEC04, 0x) = 0
sigaction(SIGHUP, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGHUP, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGINT, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGINT, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGQUIT, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGQUIT, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGILL, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGILL, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGTRAP, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGTRAP, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGABRT, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGABRT, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGEMT, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGEMT, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGFPE, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGFPE, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGBUS, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGBUS, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGSEGV, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGSYS, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGSYS, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGPIPE, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGPIPE, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGALRM, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGALRM, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGTERM, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGTERM, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGUSR1, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGUSR1, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGUSR2, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGUSR2, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGPWR, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGPWR, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGURG, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGURG, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGPOLL, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGPOLL, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGVTALRM, 0x, 0xEB80)= 0
sigaction(SIGVTALRM, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60)= 0
sigaction(SIGPROF, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGPROF, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGXCPU, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGXCPU, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGXFSZ, 0x, 0xEB80) = 0
sigaction(SIGXFSZ, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGRTMIN, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGRTMIN+1, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60) = 0
sigaction(SIGRTMIN+2, 0xEAE0, 0xEB60)
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
> You need to tell us additional facts about the server that are relevant to the >question. > > Eg, Is /var/qmail/queue on a separate partition? Yes, it is. /dev/dsk/c2t5d1s68404669 5654879 266574468%/var/qmail /dev/dsk/c2t5d0s643080643 21556631 2109320651%/mailhome > > What are the iostats like on each of the spindles? # iostat 10 tty sd0 sd6 sd20 sd65 cpu tin tout kps tps serv kps tps serv kps tps serv kps tps serv us sy wt id 0 24 182 12 330 00 2440 3025 1619 2522 38 36 22 4 08 61 5 1130 00 1061 156 30 1894 3083 40 42 11 7 08 148 18 240 00 594 98 9 1512 2612 47 41 8 4 08 137 9 280 00 527 93 6 1528 2651 49 42 3 6 08 97 12 210 00 2529 3355 2386 3972 35 47 17 2 08 31 3 930 00 1049 160 35 2194 3812 36 43 10 11 sd65 is /var/qmail df20 is /mailhome > > How are you running qmail-smtpd? It's running from tcpserver. /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -x/etc/smtp.rules.cdb -H -R -c300 -u 60004 -g 65535 0 smtp /var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd & > > what are your concurrency settings? Local is 50, remote is 100. > > What pop server are you using? Qmail's, with the qpopbulletin patches. /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -H -R -c400 0 pop3 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popup total.net /bin/checkpassword /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popbull /etc/qpopbull /var/qmail/bin/qmail-pop3d Maildir & > > Are the 66K mailboxes in user home directories all in /home? No, it's split up into the first letter of the user ID. gkmtrp:x:70908:1:Gregs trip email:/mailhome/g/gkmtrp:/bin/ftponly > > What does qmail-qstat show? > # /var/qmail/bin/qmail-qstat messages in queue: 3602 messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0 That about covers it. There were 2500 in the queue when I sent the original Email (at 10:53, it's now 11:25) Greg
Re: /var/qmail/control
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 08:21:52AM +, Christopher Tarricone wrote: > My mail server has several names... There is the name that is in the > HOSTNAME file and there are the names assoaited to it in my DNS. > the hostname is tar-valon.pds2k.com > other names in the dns are... > mail.pds2k.com > www.pds2k.com > ftp.pds2k.com > > Should I put the mail.pds2k.com in the ' me ' & ' locals ' files? You forgot to tell us what you're trying to accomplish. Greetz, Peter. -- Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder | | 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; | C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.' | Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
Re: [ncruz@isel.pt: Local Procmail ("+" feature)]
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 08:36:13AM -0600, Ben Beuchler wrote: > Originally posted to the vchkpw list, thought someone here might know what > he's talking about. Well qmail has this feature with the '-' instead of '+', and IIRC this is configurable as well. Greetz, Peter. -- Peter van Dijk - student/sysadmin/ircoper/madly in love/pretending coder | | 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; | C++ makes it harder, but when you do it blows your whole leg off.' | Bjarne Stroustrup, Inventor of C++
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, Greg Moeller wrote: > We're running Qmail as a mainline ISP mailserver. h... i only know qmail .. is Qmail a new version ? *loL* ^^^ -KoS -- http://www.kos.li/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Say NO to HTML in mail and news
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
What other patches are you running? In particular, big-todo? Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
> What other patches are you running? In particular, big-todo? > > Charles > -- I don't understand. Solaris patches, or qmail patches? As for qmail, I'm running it pretty much vanilla, no patches at all. Greg
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 11:25:34AM -0600, Greg Moeller wrote:
> > You need to tell us additional facts about the server that are relevant to the
>question.
> >
> > Eg, Is /var/qmail/queue on a separate partition?
> Yes, it is.
> /dev/dsk/c2t5d1s68404669 5654879 266574468%/var/qmail
Hmm. 2Gig of /var/qmail, that seems quite large, even for 3,000 queue entries. Btw,
3000 queue entries is not necessarily a problem. That's about 100K per mail message,
which is very large indeed. Is there something else significant on that partition?
> /dev/dsk/c2t5d0s643080643 21556631 2109320651%/mailhome
>
> >
> > What are the iostats like on each of the spindles?
> # iostat 10
> tty sd0 sd6 sd20 sd65 cpu
> tin tout kps tps serv kps tps serv kps tps serv kps tps serv us sy wt id
>0 24 182 12 330 00 2440 3025 1619 2522 38 36 22 4
>08 61 5 1130 00 1061 156 30 1894 3083 40 42 11 7
>08 148 18 240 00 594 98 9 1512 2612 47 41 8 4
>08 137 9 280 00 527 93 6 1528 2651 49 42 3 6
>08 97 12 210 00 2529 3355 2386 3972 35 47 17 2
>08 31 3 930 00 1049 160 35 2194 3812 36 43 10 11
> sd65 is /var/qmail
> df20 is /mailhome
Looks like both disks are getting pummelled into the ground. 200+ tps is a lot!
> > How are you running qmail-smtpd?
> It's running from tcpserver.
> /usr/local/bin/tcpserver -x/etc/smtp.rules.cdb -H -R -c300 -u 60004 -g 65535 0 smtp
>/var/qmail/bin/qmail-smtpd &
> >
> > what are your concurrency settings?
> Local is 50, remote is 100.
So you can have upto 350 processes trying to do i/o to the queue. That seems
high to me. You might want to a separate instance of qmail handling inbound smtp
and outbound smtp. That way you can control the concurrency better.
> > What does qmail-qstat show?
> >
> # /var/qmail/bin/qmail-qstat
> messages in queue: 3602
> messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0
That's good. big todo wont do much for you. It may simply be that you're trying to run
too much concurrency for a single spindle. How may of each time of qmail process do you
have?
ps -ef | grep qmail-|awk '{print $9}' | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr
>
> That about covers it. There were 2500 in the queue when I sent the original
> Email (at 10:53, it's now 11:25)
How many were remote and how many were local?
Regards.
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
I don't think bigtodo is going to help much given that his todo is empty - at least in the one sample we have. On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 11:48:46AM -0600, Greg Moeller wrote: > > What other patches are you running? In particular, big-todo? > > > > Charles > > -- > I don't understand. > Solaris patches, or qmail patches? > > As for qmail, I'm running it pretty much vanilla, no patches at all. > > Greg > >
Alias of Virtual Domains
I have some domains with different names, but they are really the same one. It's something like: my-domain.com, mydomain.com, my-domain.net, mydomain.net... It is possible to make each of the domains an alias of the "real one" (in this case, "my-domain.com"). I'm using vpopmail, and I though that making a link from ~vpopmail/domains/alias.tld to ~vpopmail/domains/my-domain.com will be enough, am I wrong?? -- Pablo Martínez Schroder begin:vcard n:Martínez Schroder;Pablo x-mozilla-html:FALSE org:Hidra Telecomunicaciones y Multimedia;Sistemas version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Ingeniero de Sistemas adr;quoted-printable:;;C/Casa de Campos, 3=0D=0A29640 M=E1laga;Málaga;;; x-mozilla-cpt:;0 fn:Pablo Martínez Schroder end:vcard
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
>
> which is very large indeed. Is there something else significant on that partition?
The queue itself is taking 512Meg of space. The other thing there is a huge
log of pop accesses I was using to work out stats of how many pops per day.
>
> So you can have upto 350 processes trying to do i/o to the queue. That seems
> high to me. You might want to a separate instance of qmail handling inbound smtp
> and outbound smtp. That way you can control the concurrency better.
How would one split it apart? I suppose we could have the clients connect to
one IP/host for their mail, but anything coming into the MX for the box
eventually has to show up on this box anyway.
>
> > > What does qmail-qstat show?
> > >
> > # /var/qmail/bin/qmail-qstat
> > messages in queue: 3602
> > messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0
>
> That's good. big todo wont do much for you. It may simply be that you're trying to
>run
> too much concurrency for a single spindle. How may of each time of qmail process do
>you
> have?
>
> ps -ef | grep qmail-|awk '{print $9}' | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr
223
154 total.net
100 Maildir
38 /var/qmail/bin/qmail-popbull
8 airfrance.fr
4 istar.ca
4 airmauritius.intnet.mu
3 jetequipment.com
2 videotron.net
2 pal.com.ph
2 netcom.ca
2 mail.e-centives.com
2 infonet.by
2 hydro.qc.ca
2 hotmail.com
2 dlh.de
2 csst.qc.ca
2 comair.co.za
2 aom-minerve.fr
2 aerolineas.com.ar
1 yemenia.com.ye
It goes on from there for some time...
>
>
> How many were remote and how many were local?
Is there an option in qstat to determine remote and local?
I'm pretty sure it's all remote, and probably all Mailerdaemon.
# /var/qmail/bin/qmail-qstat
messages in queue: 4578
messages in queue but not yet preprocessed: 0
>
>
> Regards.
Greg
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
>> On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 10:53:27 -0600, >> Greg Moeller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: G> Normally it keeps up pretty good, but when there's heavy spamming it can G> start to get behind with between 10,000 and 20,000 Email in the queue. If spamming is the main problem, have you looked into tarpitting? Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 10:32:36 -0500 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Tarpitting Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> There was some discussion a while back about tarpitting. If you don't know what that is (I didn't when it first came up), it's the process of inserting a small sleep in an SMTP session for each RCPT TO after some set number of RCPT TOs. The idea is to thwart spammers who would hand your SMTP server a single message with a long list of RCPT TOs. [...] See http://www.palomine.net/qmail/tarpit.patch. -- Karl Vogel ASC/YCOA, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
I think the other thing is that his smtp concurrency via tcpserver is serving a dual purpose in that it's providing enough concurrency for his internal people as well as for MX traffic. That means it has to be set fairly high so that his internal people always get a connection. I'd be inclined to put the MX on a separate (multi-homed) address running a separate instance of tcpserver which has a *much* lower concurrency than 300 and have the original tcpserver concurrency set to something lower to match the internal requirements. Other possibilities are to lower the concurrencylocal on an instance of qmail that handles MX traffic so that even if a spammer gets thru the delivery is distributed across greater time. Regards. On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 01:22:12PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 10:53:27 -0600, > >> Greg Moeller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > G> Normally it keeps up pretty good, but when there's heavy spamming it can > G> start to get behind with between 10,000 and 20,000 Email in the queue. > >If spamming is the main problem, have you looked into tarpitting? > >Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 10:32:36 -0500 >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Tarpitting >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >From: Chris Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >There was some discussion a while back about tarpitting. If you don't >know what that is (I didn't when it first came up), it's the process >of inserting a small sleep in an SMTP session for each RCPT TO after >some set number of RCPT TOs. The idea is to thwart spammers who would >hand your SMTP server a single message with a long list of RCPT TOs. >[...] > >See http://www.palomine.net/qmail/tarpit.patch. > > -- > Karl Vogel > ASC/YCOA, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433, USA > [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newbie... Question..
I have a qmail server up and running GREAT.. all is well.. BUT... I want to bring up another that will Que up mail should the real mail server crash, need rebooting, Melt down to slag, or ETC.. Anyone have a how-to for that ?.. Many thanks in advance. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So? No answer?? (Was: could it be? A bug?)
I feel kinda weird replying to myself, but...
HELLO??? Anybody out there?
Regards;
Ricardo
On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 07:20:18PM +, Ricardo Cerqueira wrote:
> Well;
>
> People... (Dan?) Is there any particular reason why qmail-rspawn's default
>behaviour is to mark failures as permanent, instead of temporary?
>
> Here's why I ask... Our relays have an incoming interface, and an outgoing
>interface... also, those relays send the mail back in if it's recipient is a
>customer, and send it out if not. Yesterday, one of the mail relays my ISP uses for
>customers had a hardware problem: the "outgoing" NIC was malfunctioning. So,
>qmail-remote crashed whenever it was called by qmail-rspawn.
>
> According to this snippet of rspawn's code...
>
> switch(wait_exitcode(wstat))
> {
>case 0: break;
>case 111: substdio_puts(ss,"ZUnable to run qmail-remote.\n"); return;
>default: substdio_puts(ss,"DUnable to run qmail-remote.\n"); return;
> }
>
>
> The default behaviour is to return "D" status (permanent failure)...
> So, for a period of 13 hours, over 12k mails were lost (bounced to
>postmaster), instead of remaining in queue. (needless to say, that was not a nice
>thing to happen)
> I've done a few tests (removing the exec bit from qmail-remote, and replacing
>qmail-remote with a non-functioning binary) and confirmed all mails are bounced to
>postmaster, instead of being queued.
> Then, I changed the default exit code to "Z" (temporary failure), recompiled,
>and ran the same tests. This time, it went like it should... mails were not
>delivered, but were stored in queue... qmail-remote was restored, I SIGALRM'ed
>qmail-send, and all of the test messages were delivered.
> So... Is there any reason why it should return "D"? Or is there any reason why
>it shouldn't return "Z"?
>
> Best regards;
> Ricardo Cerqueira
>
> +---
> | Ricardo Cerqueira
> | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42
> | Novis - Rede Técnica
> | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal
--
+---
| Ricardo Cerqueira
| PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42
| Novis - Rede Técnica
| Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
Greg Moeller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Charles Cazabon wrote: > > What other patches are you running? In particular, big-todo? > I don't understand. > Solaris patches, or qmail patches? > > As for qmail, I'm running it pretty much vanilla, no patches at all. Yes, I meant qmail patches. big-todo is a patch by Russell Nelson, updated by others: http://www.qmail.org/big-todo.103.patch It can increase qmail's performance by an enormous amount if there are large numbers of messages injected into the queue but qmail hasn't yet preprocessed them. There's also a note on the www.qmail.org page about changing conf-split and recompiling if your queue will ever get above 23k messages or so. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: So? No answer?? (Was: could it be? A bug?)
On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 19:41:14 +0100 , "Ricardo Cerqueira" writes:
> > According to this snippet of rspawn's code...
> >
> > switch(wait_exitcode(wstat))
> > {
> >case 0: break;
> >case 111: substdio_puts(ss,"ZUnable to run qmail-remote.\n"); return;
> >default: substdio_puts(ss,"DUnable to run qmail-remote.\n"); return;
> > }
> > Then, I changed the default exit code to "Z" (temporary
> > failure), recompiled, and ran the same tests. This time, it went
> > like it should... mails were not delivered, but were stored in
> > queue... qmail-remote was restored, I SIGALRM'ed qmail-send, and
> > all of the test messages were delivered.
> > So... Is there any reason why it should return "D"? Or is there
> > any reason why it shouldn't return "Z"?
Not as far as I can see. I'm running with a similar change.
Actually, my change neuters the effects of execvp returning:
*** qmail-rspawn.c 1999/04/23 16:48:16 1.1
--- qmail-rspawn.c 2000/01/27 15:16:35 1.2
***
*** 96,103
if (fd_move(1,fdout) == -1) _exit(111);
if (fd_copy(2,1) == -1) _exit(111);
execvp(*args,args);
!if (error_temp(errno)) _exit(111);
!_exit(100);
}
return f;
}
--- 96,102
if (fd_move(1,fdout) == -1) _exit(111);
if (fd_copy(2,1) == -1) _exit(111);
execvp(*args,args);
!_exit(111);
}
return f;
}
The root problem in my case was a FreeBSD semi-bug...
Between 2.2.x and 3.x, the bad-old vfork() semantics
returned (i.e. parent and child had the same address
space). This lead to a memory pseudo-leak[1] in
qmail-rspawn, which then ran into an rlimit, which
prevented rspawn from, well, spawning.
Quick (and effective) fix:
sysctl -w kern.fast_vfork=0
stopped the leaking instantly.
--
Chris Mikkelson | Vampireware; n, a project capable of sucking the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | lifeblood out of anyone unfortunate enough to be
| assigned to it which never actually sees the light
| of day, but nonetheless refuses to die. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
[1] "pseudo" in the sense that it only leaked virtual memory.
The qmail-rspawn would have a VSZ of ~500M or so, while only
a couple hundred K resident.
Re: Qmail loading down Sun enterprise 450.
What are you using for logging? cyclog or syslog? If you're not currently using cyclog, you might want to strongly consider switching to it. --Adam
Re: Qmail + LDAP problems
Do you have ldap related control files? AFAIR, control/ldapserver must exist. On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, blair christensen wrote: > Hello, > I am running Qmail 1.03 with the LDAP patch from http://www.nrg4u.com > on a Solaris 2.6 box. LDAP is OpenLDAP 1.2.9 residing on the same > box. > > The patch applies cleanly to the source, and I'm able to compile qmail > successfully. However, when I try to start qmail, I get: > > bash-2.02# /var/qmail/rc > alert: cannot start: hath the daemon spawn no fire? -- Nikolay Borodachev
Re: Qmail + LDAP problems
Yeah, I do have those. I added the ones mentioned in the QLDAPINSTALL file, one of which is 'ldapserver'. Is there a minimum set that is needed? Right now I have them all defined; could it be that one of the non-required files is causing this? grasping at straws, blair On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 03:43:21PM -0600, Nikolay Borodachev wrote: > > Do you have ldap related control files? AFAIR, control/ldapserver must > exist. > > On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, blair christensen wrote: > > > Hello, > > I am running Qmail 1.03 with the LDAP patch from http://www.nrg4u.com > > on a Solaris 2.6 box. LDAP is OpenLDAP 1.2.9 residing on the same > > box. > > > > The patch applies cleanly to the source, and I'm able to compile qmail > > successfully. However, when I try to start qmail, I get: > > > > bash-2.02# /var/qmail/rc > > alert: cannot start: hath the daemon spawn no fire? > > -- > Nikolay Borodachev
Next Hop
Hello, I'm trying to configure my MX host running qmail 1.03 to pass all incoming mails to another host that makes the local delivery. While not solve this problem I can't migrate from Postfix to qmail, in postfix I use a config file called "transports" and add a line like this : domain.comsmtp:[a.b.c.d] This means that all mails for "domain.com" recived in this server are passed via smtp to "a.b.c.d". Please, I need to do this in qmail but I cant find how to do this in the Docs/Faqs/etc Tnx. Ricardo D. Albano
Re: Next Hop
It's done through the smtproutes file. Do a 'man qmail-remote' for more info. Rick McMillin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems Administrator Manager, Network Operations I-Land Internet Services - Original Message - From: "Ricardo D. Albano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2000 4:27 PM Subject: Next Hop > Hello, I'm trying to configure my MX host running qmail 1.03 to pass all > incoming mails to another host that makes the local delivery. > > While not solve this problem I can't migrate from Postfix to qmail, in > postfix I use a config file called "transports" and add a line like this : > > domain.comsmtp:[a.b.c.d] > > This means that all mails for "domain.com" recived in this server are passed > via smtp to "a.b.c.d". > > Please, I need to do this in qmail but I cant find how to do this in the > Docs/Faqs/etc > > Tnx. > > Ricardo D. Albano > > >
Re: Qmail + LDAP problems
Do you have a user name and password set up in qmail control files to access LDAP server? That user must have rights to read LDAP directory. Try to query LDAP server using that username and password. On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, blair christensen wrote: > Yeah, I do have those. I added the ones mentioned in the QLDAPINSTALL > file, one of which is 'ldapserver'. Is there a minimum set that is > needed? Right now I have them all defined; could it be that one of > the non-required files is causing this? > > grasping at straws, > blair > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 03:43:21PM -0600, Nikolay Borodachev wrote: > > > > Do you have ldap related control files? AFAIR, control/ldapserver must > > exist. > > > > On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, blair christensen wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > I am running Qmail 1.03 with the LDAP patch from http://www.nrg4u.com > > > on a Solaris 2.6 box. LDAP is OpenLDAP 1.2.9 residing on the same > > > box. > > > > > > The patch applies cleanly to the source, and I'm able to compile qmail > > > successfully. However, when I try to start qmail, I get: > > > > > > bash-2.02# /var/qmail/rc > > > alert: cannot start: hath the daemon spawn no fire? > > > > -- > > Nikolay Borodachev > -- Nikolay Borodachev
Re: Qmail + LDAP problems
For the username and password, what I would like to do, at least for now, is to just perform an anonymous bind. How do I represent that in the control files? However, I have also tried using a username/password with which I can successfully perform an ldapsearch against the db. qmail still doesn't launch successfully, however, when given this information. thanks, blair On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 04:39:39PM -0600, Nikolay Borodachev wrote: > > Do you have a user name and password set up in qmail control files to > access LDAP server? That user must have rights to read LDAP directory. Try > to query LDAP server using that username and password. > > On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, blair christensen wrote: > > > Yeah, I do have those. I added the ones mentioned in the QLDAPINSTALL > > file, one of which is 'ldapserver'. Is there a minimum set that is > > needed? Right now I have them all defined; could it be that one of > > the non-required files is causing this? > > > > grasping at straws, > > blair > > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 03:43:21PM -0600, Nikolay Borodachev wrote: > > > > > > Do you have ldap related control files? AFAIR, control/ldapserver must > > > exist. > > > > > > On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, blair christensen wrote: > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > I am running Qmail 1.03 with the LDAP patch from http://www.nrg4u.com > > > > on a Solaris 2.6 box. LDAP is OpenLDAP 1.2.9 residing on the same > > > > box. > > > > > > > > The patch applies cleanly to the source, and I'm able to compile qmail > > > > successfully. However, when I try to start qmail, I get: > > > > > > > > bash-2.02# /var/qmail/rc > > > > alert: cannot start: hath the daemon spawn no fire? > > > > > > -- > > > Nikolay Borodachev > > > > -- > Nikolay Borodachev -- http://www.devclue.com/gnupg for public key. buggy software writes itself
Re: Next Hop
Nice!, I done and it work. Thankx. I have a very simple question : How to reload postfix configuration (some like restart all postfix daemons to reload the configurations files). Bye RDA.- >It's done through the smtproutes file. Do a >'man qmail-remote' for more info. > >Rick McMillin >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Systems Administrator >Manager, Network Operations >I-Land Internet Services > >- Original Message - >From: "Ricardo D. Albano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Monday, March 27, 2000 4:27 PM >Subject: Next Hop > > >> Hello, I'm trying to configure my MX host running qmail 1.03 to pass all >> incoming mails to another host that makes the local delivery. >> >> While not solve this problem I can't migrate from Postfix to qmail, in >> postfix I use a config file called "transports" and add a line like this : >> >> domain.comsmtp:[a.b.c.d] >> >> This means that all mails for "domain.com" recived in this server are >passed >> via smtp to "a.b.c.d". >> >> Please, I need to do this in qmail but I cant find how to do this in the >> Docs/Faqs/etc >> >> Tnx. >> >> Ricardo D. Albano >> >> >> >
Re: Qmail + LDAP problems
I've just checked my qmail-ldap settings and found no username password there :-). However, when I removed control/ldapserver qmail refused to start saying "cannot start: hath the daemon spawn no fire?". Everything went back to normal when I put control/ldapserver to its place. So, I don't really know but the problem seems to depend on existence of that file. On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, blair christensen wrote: > For the username and password, what I would like to do, at least for > now, is to just perform an anonymous bind. How do I represent that in > the control files? > > However, I have also tried using a username/password with which I can > successfully perform an ldapsearch against the db. qmail still > doesn't launch successfully, however, when given this information. > > thanks, > blair > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 04:39:39PM -0600, Nikolay Borodachev wrote: > > > > Do you have a user name and password set up in qmail control files to > > access LDAP server? That user must have rights to read LDAP directory. Try > > to query LDAP server using that username and password. > > > > On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, blair christensen wrote: > > > > > Yeah, I do have those. I added the ones mentioned in the QLDAPINSTALL > > > file, one of which is 'ldapserver'. Is there a minimum set that is > > > needed? Right now I have them all defined; could it be that one of > > > the non-required files is causing this? > > > > > > grasping at straws, > > > blair > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 03:43:21PM -0600, Nikolay Borodachev wrote: > > > > > > > > Do you have ldap related control files? AFAIR, control/ldapserver must > > > > exist. > > > > > > > > On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, blair christensen wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > I am running Qmail 1.03 with the LDAP patch from http://www.nrg4u.com > > > > > on a Solaris 2.6 box. LDAP is OpenLDAP 1.2.9 residing on the same > > > > > box. > > > > > > > > > > The patch applies cleanly to the source, and I'm able to compile qmail > > > > > successfully. However, when I try to start qmail, I get: > > > > > > > > > > bash-2.02# /var/qmail/rc > > > > > alert: cannot start: hath the daemon spawn no fire? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Nikolay Borodachev > > > > > > > -- > > Nikolay Borodachev > > -- > http://www.devclue.com/gnupg for public key. > > buggy software writes itself > -- Nikolay Borodachev
New install...
Running qmail on Solaris 7+dotforward+fastforward+procmail into /var/spool/mail/delivery. The log shows a successful delivery: Mar 27 17:19:25 homer qmail: 954199165.667066 starting delivery 1: msg 377310 to local [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mar 27 17:19:25 homer qmail: 954199165.667663 status: local 1/10 remote 0/20 Mar 27 17:19:25 homer qmail: 954199165.776406 delivery 1: success: did_0+0+1/ Mar 27 17:19:25 homer qmail: 954199165.799606 status: local 0/10 remote 0/20 Mar 27 17:19:25 homer qmail: 954199165.812838 end msg 3773101 Nothing ever appears in /var/spool/mail. I have done this plenty of times so I know its something stupid. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks. andy
Re: Problem with sending mail to virtual domain
At 10:14 27/03/2000 -0500, Chris Johnson wrote: >On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 07:38:28PM -0700, Irwan Hadi wrote: >> At 09:29 27/03/2000 -0500, Chris Johnson wrote: >> >On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 07:18:48PM -0700, Irwan Hadi wrote: >It's absolutely okay, and it's required if you want your mail setup to work. It >had better be okay, because you can't stop someone from pointing a name in his >domain at one of your addresses. Okay, I am understand ;) I think CNAME is enough for mail system as for virtual domain with IP aliassing hosting ;) Thanks for your support ! > >Chris --- AFLHI 058009990407128029/089802---(102598//991024)
Re: New install...
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 05:41:13PM -0600, Andy Walden wrote: > Nothing ever appears in /var/spool/mail. I have done this plenty of times > so I know its something stupid. Any thoughts would be appreciated. a) an empty .qmail file b) a program in a .qmail file exits 99. c) "fastforward -p" Regards, Uwe
Re: Qmail + LDAP problems
> >Do you have ldap related control files? AFAIR, control/ldapserver must >exist. > >On Mon, 27 Mar 2000, blair christensen wrote: > >> Hello, >> I am running Qmail 1.03 with the LDAP patch from http://www.nrg4u.com >> on a Solaris 2.6 box. LDAP is OpenLDAP 1.2.9 residing on the same >> box. >> >> The patch applies cleanly to the source, and I'm able to compile qmail >> successfully. However, when I try to start qmail, I get: >> >> bash-2.02# /var/qmail/rc >> alert: cannot start: hath the daemon spawn no fire? I got the same error using qmail without any patches, after renaming /var/qmail/bin/qmail-local and /var/qmail/bin/qmail-remote for an amavis installation. Are qmail-remote and qmail-local located in /var/qmail/bin and have the correct file permission? Perhaps something went wrong while compiling of the patched source. - Roland
Re: Sendmail help
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, Eric Dahnke wrote: > > Hello List, > > I've been a long time (relative) user of qmail, and now need to use several sendmail >machines. > HOWEVER, all I have to do is make it so that mail sent from those machines arrives >elsewhere as > [EMAIL PROTECTED] instead of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > This would be a control/me file change in qmail. Anyone know how to do the same on >sendmail > 8.9.3-10? > > > > - Eric Dahnke found out where is your sendmail.cf on your machines and define macros M i think there may be something like this #who I masquerade as (null for no masquerading) DM and change it to DMdomain.com yuliy -- Yuliy Minchev, Systems Administrator NOAC Bulgaria
