Re: Connections Slow with LVS
This could possible be you not using -R with tcpserver: -R: Do not attempt to obtain $TCPREMOTEINFO from the remote host. To avoid loops, you must use this option for servers on TCP ports 53 and 113. dude... -jeremy On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Mehul Choksi wrote: Hi guys, any ideas why qmail with the Linux Virtual Server takes so long for the connection even with the tcpserver R and t 0?? Also, I have not yet applied the big-concurrency patch (I always run in to trouble with that patch..!!), and yet I have set the concurrencyremote to 254. So far it is doing good, but not sure if it is okay. Any suggestion? Thanks in advance, Mehul. -- salad.
Re: problem in pop3d
this is perfect in every way. -jeremy On Sat, 21 Oct 2000, Gaurav Parajuli wrote: my computer crashes when prince tries to go through the secret door of the library. Please provide help. __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. http://im.yahoo.com/ -- What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence. -- Wittgenstein
any news on the 2.0 front?
Just looking for any news on qmail 2.0. Thanks -jeremy
Re: Problem: 552 max. message size exceeded
This is true, yet I don't understand why Wietse claims so many more people are using Postfix. I don't have the link to the thread off hand, but I remember reading something along the lines of "No one uses qmail, a few people are using Postfix" which boggled my mind because all the places I've visited in the past month or so in the Silicon Valley, about 10 - 15 companies all use qmail, none use Postfix. So where is he getting his information? -jeremy Toni Mueller writes: Or is qmail dead due to Postfix success? qmail's share of *.com mail servers has grown past 5%, behind only sendmail at 56%, Imail at 7.6%, and Exchange at 5.5%. Next are Post.Office at 4.5% and Exim at 1.8%. There are eight servers around 1%, including Netscape's server, Eudora's MacOS server, the NT version of sendmail, and Postfix. The total number of servers that have ever run Postfix is smaller than the number of qmail servers added in the past six months. ---Dan -- http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
how do you use a deferral host in qmail?
I'm wondering if it's possible to setup a deferral host in qmail? If a message gets deferred, then the mail goes to another machine in charge of just retrying deferred messages instead of clogging up the main mailer machine. Someone told me this is possible to do in sendmail. I haven't used sendmail in years so I don't know first hand, but it's been my impression that qmail can do anything sendmail can do. Thanks -jeremy
Re: how do you use a deferral host in qmail?
Hmm, but qmail does get bogged down by deferrals from my experience. I can't really see how it cannot, through just the fact that it has to log future deferred attempts, etc. If you have a very large amount of mail that's constantly getting new messages for outgoing, those deferred messages when retried take up a qmail-remote process that could be dedicated to an actual deliverable mail instead of retrying something that was deferred and may get deferred again. I'd like slow mail, deferred or whatever on a host that's dedicated to retrying and not getting new mail. Even when new mail stops, qmail sits there and tries to deliver deferred mail until queuelifetime is exceeded. Why not have a host dedicated to those types of mails instead of bogging down your main mail machine. In my case it seems lke it would be useful. I'm delivering 1 - 2 million messages a day and a large percentage of that gets deferred. -jeremy Jeremy Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm wondering if it's possible to setup a deferral host in qmail? If a message gets deferred, then the mail goes to another machine in charge of just retrying deferred messages instead of clogging up the main mailer machine. No, not out of the box. But it's not necessayr, because qmail doesn't get bogged down by deferred messages. Someone told me this is possible to do in sendmail. It is. I haven't used sendmail in years so I don't know first hand, but it's been my impression that qmail can do anything sendmail can do. Not really... But then, not everything sendmail does is worth doing. -Dave http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: how do you use a deferral host in qmail?
Actually I've though of that and it would be easy enough, but the amount of error handling for failed messages would seem to be the real trick to calling qmail-remote directly. It would definitely make it fast, but I think there's enough in qmail that I don't want to reinvent the wheel in a lot of cases. I though about using qmqpc somehow to do what I want, but hmm...not sutre how to really piece it together or plan it logically. -jeremy I'd like slow mail, deferred or whatever on a host that's dedicated to retrying and not getting new mail. You may want to try a custom hack. I've heard that some high volume sites call qmail-remote directly from the application that generates the mail, then hand off messages that get soft failures. Often it's enough just to hand them off to normal qmail, but I'd think it'd be just as easy to pass them to another host using qmqp, using qmail-qmqpc rather than qmail-queue. -- John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869 [EMAIL PROTECTED], Village Trustee and Sewer Commissioner, http://iecc.com/johnl, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: how do you use a deferral host in qmail?
My remote concurrency is 500, so that's not a problem. In what I've seen and you have to understand, I'm just an admin here, I really have nothing to do with the "quality" of the mail addresses that come through here. That's a story within itself, but out of 2 million emails, 40% of those on average are deferred. That's a lot of emails sitting getting retried, I've often seen my remote concurrency consist completely of deferral retries, especially of for some reason qmail need to be restarted or something...so if it has to sort through 800,000 mails that may get deferred again, that's wasted time and resources. There are a number of things I know I can do, nothing is balanced currently, but what I think would be nice is have the deferral host be load balanced across a few deferral machines, keeps those messages off the main mailers and we don't really care what happens to the deferred messages as long as they don't restrict outgoing mail. I know I have options, but a deferral host just seems like it would be a "nice thing" to have available. -jeremy Jeremy Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmm, but qmail does get bogged down by deferrals from my experience. Not like sendmail does, though. qmail's quadratic backoff on retries helps, as do its overall higher efficiency and its table of nonresponding hosts (see "man qmail-tcpto"). I can't really see how it cannot, through just the fact that it has to log future deferred attempts, etc. Logging with multilog is very cheap. If you have a very large amount of mail that's constantly getting new messages for outgoing, those deferred messages when retried take up a qmail-remote process that could be dedicated to an actual deliverable mail instead of retrying something that was deferred and may get deferred again. I'd like slow mail, deferred or whatever on a host that's dedicated to retrying and not getting new mail. If you've got a spare host, why not split the load? What's the advantage of shuffling deferred messages from one server to another? That's a pretty expensive operation, even for qmail. Even when new mail stops, qmail sits there and tries to deliver deferred mail until queuelifetime is exceeded. Why not have a host dedicated to those types of mails instead of bogging down your main mail machine. Most folks don't find deferred messages such a burden. They use up a few qmail-remote's and some space in the queue, but that's no big deal. Have you bumped up concurrencyremote to account for deferalls? In my case it seems lke it would be useful. I'm delivering 1 - 2 million messages a day and a large percentage of that gets deferred. ``Profile. Don't speculate.'' What percentage of messages are deffered? How many attempts, on average, does it take to deliver them? How much burden would be shifted by delivering them to a fallback host after the first deferral? Would a fallback host configuration be more efficient/faster/more effective than a dual-host configuration? -Dave http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: how do you use a deferral host in qmail?
So it can't be done is what you're saying. I haven't really seen any good arguments as to why it shouldn't be done, but obviously the DJ cronies aren't going to argue his logic. It's frustrating for someone like me who can recognize the many advantages of qmail, even with this little set back it kills sendmail, but when you run into a feature that seems to be useful (I'm sure I'm ot theonly one), then you're screwed because Dan says so. -jeremy Jeremy Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My remote concurrency is 500, so that's not a problem. 500 is not a magic number guaranteed to be sufficient in all applications. In what I've seen and you have to understand, I'm just an admin here, I really have nothing to do with the "quality" of the mail addresses that come through here. That's a story within itself, but out of 2 million emails, 40% of those on average are deferred. That's a lot of emails sitting getting retried, They're only retried when their schedule says it's time to retry them. I've often seen my remote concurrency consist completely of deferral retries, That right there says that your concurrencyremote probably isn't high enough. especially of for some reason qmail need to be restarted or something... Restarts are exceptional. so if it has to sort through 800,000 mails that may get deferred again, that's wasted time and resources. Yeah, avoid restarts. I know I have options, but a deferral host just seems like it would be a "nice thing" to have available. Ah, but qmail was engineered. Dan doesn't throw in every feature that ``just seems like it would be a "nice thing" to have available''. It's conceivable that a fallback host feature could make sense in some applications, but I suspect Dan weighed the pros and cons and decided it wasn't worth the effort. You can: implement it yourself, switch to a mailer that supports it, or consider other options with qmail such as calling qmail-remote directly and queuing to a fallback host if that fails. -Dave http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: how do you use a deferral host in qmail?
You're cocky and absolutely useless. Thanks -jeremy Jeremy Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So it can't be done is what you're saying. In my first reply I said it couldn't be done "out of the box". qmail is highly modular, though, so a fairly simple qmail-inject wrapper like John Levine suggested could be used to implement this functionality: try to send the message directly with qmail-remote. If that succeeds, you're done. If it fails, queue the message on your fallback server. This isn't rocket science. I haven't really seen any good arguments as to why it shouldn't be done, I haven't seen any good arguments as to why it *should* be done. Dan shuns features that *might* work. but obviously the DJ cronies aren't going to argue his logic. I'm not a DJB crony, but I'm not above second guessing him at times. :-) It's frustrating for someone like me who can recognize the many advantages of qmail, even with this little set back it kills sendmail, but when you run into a feature that seems to be useful (I'm sure I'm ot theonly one), then you're screwed because Dan says so. Oh, and with other MTA's you're not at the whim of the developer? If you wish for a sendmail or PostFix feature, it will come to pass, even against the will of the author? Fascinating. I didn't know that. That would certainly explain how many "features" made it into sendmail, though. :-) -Dave http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: daemontools-0.61 and qmailanalog
Ok, this part I don't understand. I'm using the t option, yet in my long I see no timestamp at all. Tmp is just a sample output from multilog. Are you saying that tai64n should be used at logging? Perhaps you could give me an example that would better clarify this for me. Thanks -jeremy So what's tmp (ie, where does it come from)? Just looking at that command line, it looks a lot like you're adding timestamps to every line fresh each time you run the above command pipeline, which means that you're giving every line pretty much the same timestamp. tai64n is intended to be used to put an accurate timestamp on each line *when it's logged*, not after the fact. Since you're using multilog, you don't need it at all; just use the t action in multilog. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) URL:http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
how to have mail go out on different interfaces???
I have three domains. If I send mail from domain1, I would like it to go out interface 1, if I send mail from domain2, I want it to go out interface2, if I send mail from domain3, I want it to go out interface3. Is this possible? Does this have to do wiht bindroutes? Thanks -jeremy
daemontools-0.61 and qmailanalog
So I'm using multilog and qmailanalog. I did some searching on the mail
list and found some scripts that do the hex conversion, etc, but I'm
seeing somewhat strange results anyway. All my time signatures change
each time I run the logs through the setup of scripts and qmailanalog even
though the log doesn't change:
cat tmp | tai64n | ./tai64n2time | /usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/matchup |
/usr/local/qmailanalog/bin/zoverall
I get:
Total delivery attempts: 5922
success: 27
failure: 5
deferral: 5890
Total ddelay (s): 3.802111
Average ddelay per success (s): 0.140819
Total xdelay (s): 610.980386
Average xdelay per delivery attempt (s): 0.103171
Time span (days): 1.7806e-05
Average concurrency: 397.144
run it again:
Total delivery attempts: 5922
success: 27
failure: 5
deferral: 5890
Total ddelay (s): 3.822751
Average ddelay per success (s): 0.141583
Total xdelay (s): 458.048486
Average xdelay per delivery attempt (s): 0.077347
Time span (days): 2.18007e-05
Average concurrency: 243.18
The ./tai64n2time is a perl scirpt posted by Jos Backus
#!/usr/local/bin/perl
while () {
if (my($s,$t,$rest)=/^\@.(\w{15})(\w{8})(.*)/) {
$s = hex($s);
$t = hex($t); $t =~ s/500$//;
$_ = "$s.$t$rest\n";
}
} continue {
print;
}
exit 0;
also I have tai64nfrac which is a c program that I believe does
the same thing, and I get the same results.
Any help on this?
Thank
-jeremy
Re: GFS and Qmail and BIG mail servers
Also have a look at silicon-gear.com, that also makes a Dlock array. -jeremy On Fri, Jan 28, 2000 at 12:41:10AM -0800, Tracy R Reed wrote: I have just become aware of the GFS project and I am BLOWN AWAY. I don't know how this project reached production quality status and escaped my radar until now. I got an email from my VAR for StorageTek disk arrays today GFS is most cool. You should be aware, however, that it is not yet production quality. The journaling code is mostly done, but it is not stable yet. Client errors can (and do) result in corruption of the entire filesystem. (As of a few weeks ago) It should be nearing Alpha quality at this point, but it is not ready for production use. and tell me what you think. Does this sound like a good way to cluster mail servers to you too? It is the holy grail of mail clustering. :) It's just not there quite yet. I have priced it out, though, and you can build quite an effective (and large) mail cluster for under 100k with it. If you're still interested in looking at it, BoxHill makes some excellent storage arrays that support hardware SCSI Dlocking. Good juju. Adam -- -- Adam Jacob - Cyber TrailsPhone - (602)906-1752 Sr. Systems AdministratorPager - (602)447-9531 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax - (602)906-1799 * Evil Lord of the Sysadmin Sith Darth Rmdashrf * -- http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: is there any way to redirect deferrals?
This is what I mean. The mail load is very high! 1 - 2 million messages at a time with a high rate of bounces and deferrals. Having deferrals sitting their doing reattempts is definitely causing some slow down on delivery. Thanks -jeremy I read the question as "If the first attempt fails, transfer this message to another machine so that the resources of the main machine will not be used up by the set of deferrals that will sit there for a week before bouncing. Have the second machine spend a week attempting delivery while the main machine continually buzzes through new mail." That would be very useful with a sendmail machine. I think the mail load would have to be pretty high for it to pay off with a qmail machine. -- Greg http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: is there any way to redirect deferrals?
Hmm, but bounces are different then deferrals, right? A bounce is a failure and will not be tried again, but a deferral remains in the queue to be tried again. -jeremy On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 02:50:49AM -0500, Jeremy Hansen wrote: Is there any way to have deferrals redirect to another system? Basically I have a machine that I need to do a large amount of outgoing mail and I'd like to keep deferrals away from the queue. If the deferrals should be redirected, it would pass the queue anyhow! if you mean that you would like to change the address [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] then put "deferrals.example.com" in QMAILHOME/control/bouncehost Or did you refer to anything else? /magnus -- http://x42.com/ http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Re: is there any way to redirect deferrals?
Also I don't believe bouncehost has anything to do with where the bounce message actually shows up, but rather just alters the bounce notice to look like it's from MAILER-DAEMON@bouncehost -jeremy On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 02:50:49AM -0500, Jeremy Hansen wrote: Is there any way to have deferrals redirect to another system? Basically I have a machine that I need to do a large amount of outgoing mail and I'd like to keep deferrals away from the queue. If the deferrals should be redirected, it would pass the queue anyhow! if you mean that you would like to change the address [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] then put "deferrals.example.com" in QMAILHOME/control/bouncehost Or did you refer to anything else? /magnus -- http://x42.com/ http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
is there any way to redirect deferrals?
Is there any way to have deferrals redirect to another system? Basically I have a machine that I need to do a large amount of outgoing mail and I'd like to keep deferrals away from the queue. Thanks -jeremy
scripting using qmail-queue?
Can someone possible show me an example script in perl that puts a message into the queue using qmail-queue directly? I'm trying to experiment with ways to deliver mail at fair and low overhead kind of way. Thanks -jeremy
Re: Linux kernel turning for mail performance?
Hmm, Thanks. Is this a build outside of the distribution? I'll have a look. I'd like to know the specific patches so I can applied this to any kernel, which I'm sure I can extract from the SRPMS. -jeremy On Tue, Feb 01, 2000 at 04:46:32PM -0500, Jeremy Hansen wrote: Is there any kernel sysctl or otherwise parameters suggested for performance using qmail on Linux? Open file handle limits, share memory, whatever? I have a goal to send at least 1 million emails in a 24 hour period from a single machine. The qmail-server I built recently has been benchmarked at 2-3million a day, with a stock redhat 1000fd kernel (it's on their ftp-site as an rpm). concurrencylocal/remote are both 255, machine hums along nicely. Most critical factor besides fd's is probably memory, and perhaps CPU. I think I had 512mbyte in this one and something along the lines of a PII-450. 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++ http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
what makes ezmlm fast?
Can someone explain to me what exactly makes ezmlm fast? I would like to try to adapt some of its functionality and speed to a customized list processor. Thanks for any input. -jeremy
Re: what makes ezmlm fast?
I understand that qmail is the MTA, but there is also functionality in ezmlm which takes advantage of qmail in a way which makes things much faster. Something about parallel smtp processes or something like that. There's more to it then just qmail itself. -jeremy On Tue, Feb 01, 2000 at 03:03:22PM -0500, Jeremy Hansen wrote: Can someone explain to me what exactly makes ezmlm fast? I would like to try to adapt some of its functionality and speed to a customized list processor. Thanks for any input. One word: qmail. 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++ http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Linux kernel turning for mail performance?
Is there any kernel sysctl or otherwise parameters suggested for performance using qmail on Linux? Open file handle limits, share memory, whatever? I have a goal to send at least 1 million emails in a 24 hour period from a single machine. Also, has anyone done any experimentation using 2.3.x kernels and qmail? Any feedback on experiences with 2.3.x? Thanks -jeremy
I want to accept, but I don't want to deliver
Basically I want to setup a dummy host that I can relay mail off of, but I don't want it to actually send the mail to remote machines. Reason we're doing this is for load testing a mail application...we want to see what happens with a real mail list without actually having the mail go out. What should I do? Thanks! -jeremy http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Y2K. We're all gonna die.
simple question. I want to bounce mail coming from a specificaddress.
I want to bounce mail coming from a specific email. FAQ? If so, point me to it and I'll read. Thanks -jeremy
RE: simple question. I want to bounce mail coming from a specif
Ok, I understand this, I've seen these posts before about bouncesaying, but what if I want to dup the behavior of a real bounce. Make it look as if my address is unreachable and no longer exists. Thanks! -jeremy Jeremy Hansen wrote/schrieb/scribsit: I want to bounce mail coming from a specific email. See "man qmail-smtpd" for badmailfrom, or tune your .qmail to say: | if [ "$SENDER" = "badguy" ] ; then bouncesaying 'Go away!' ; else exit 0 ; fi Stefan http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | pgp available from: | http://www.xxedgexx.com/pgp.html
RE: simple question. I want to bounce mail coming from a specif
Forget me :-) I'm stupid. I totally missed the point of badmailfrom. Thanks -jeremy Or try putting their email address in control/badmailfrom. mike On Thu, 31 Dec 1998, Stefan Paletta wrote: Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 01:42:46 +0100 (MEZ) From: Stefan Paletta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Qmail mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: simple question. I want to bounce mail coming from a specif Jeremy Hansen wrote/schrieb/scribsit: I want to bounce mail coming from a specific email. See "man qmail-smtpd" for badmailfrom, or tune your .qmail to say: | if [ "$SENDER" = "badguy" ] ; then bouncesaying 'Go away!' ; else exit 0 ; fi Stefan http://www.xxedgexx.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | pgp available from: | http://www.xxedgexx.com/pgp.html
