On Mar 10, 2010, at 05:51 AM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
>Good news (kinda) - another list on that server just started to slow
>down, and this time, it is a very unimportant and small list (472
>members, 466 of them have mail delivery enabled), so I can take all
>the time in the world to try and debug
Stefan Foerster wrote:
>* Mark Sapiro :
>
>[instructions for list duplication /SMTP redirection]
>> Unfortunately, I don't have any good ideas as to how to proceed from
>> there, even if this does duplicate the problem, but Barry indicated he
>> has a couple of ideas.
>
>Well, unfortunately, this
* Mark Sapiro :
> On 2/21/2010 2:15 AM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
> >
> > Bad news. I was not able to reproduce the problem on a VM, using
> > backups from the day the problem first occured. And worse, this night,
> > while I slept a troubled, disturbed sleep, dreaming of SMTP dialogues,
> > the list
On 2/21/2010 2:15 AM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
>
> Bad news. I was not able to reproduce the problem on a VM, using
> backups from the day the problem first occured. And worse, this night,
> while I slept a troubled, disturbed sleep, dreaming of SMTP dialogues,
> the list roster changed (one new mem
On Feb 20, 2010, at 11:01 PM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
>As expected, Postfix is not the culprit. Delivery to smtp-sink is
>running at the speed of molasses, too.
Now this is getting interesting .
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/2010-February/068829.html
has some perplexing numbers.
* Stefan Foerster :
> * Mark Sapiro :
> > As I said, I think it would just be the config.pck. Everything else is
> > open source software, but I don't think I want it. It's not that I'm not
> > curious because I definitely am, but I don't want to accidentally send
> > mail to any of the list member
On Feb 20, 2010, at 4:15 PM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
> What is a "smaller sub-list"? The list in question does only hold 11k
> recipients, which is not exactly large. Some off my SVN announce lists
> are much larger.
Yeah, but an announce-only list that is larger doesn't really compare to a
discu
Hi!
...[very slow list]...
Seen from a very abstract standpoint, is there some pattern in
the adresses to send? Some sorting algorithms go completely
bonkers if fed with the wrong kind of pre-sorted or patterned
input list. I did NOT look into this (not knowing enough python
yet), but having st
* Brad Knowles :
> On Feb 20, 2010, at 3:27 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>
> > As I said, I think it would just be the config.pck. Everything
> > else is open source software, but I don't think I want it. It's
> > not that I'm not curious because I definitely am, but I don't want
> > to accidentally sen
* Mark Sapiro :
> On 2/20/2010 12:56 PM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
> > So, if you are personally interested in this, I would talk to a lawyer
> > to find a way how I can legally provide you with a copy of every file
> > that is in any way related to this list.
>
> As I said, I think it would just be
* Barry Warsaw :
> On Feb 20, 2010, at 09:56 PM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
> >So, if you are personally interested in this, I would talk to a lawyer
> >to find a way how I can legally provide you with a copy of every file
> >that is in any way related to this list.
> >
> >If you are not _that_ interes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2/20/2010 1:38 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
> Take a look at lazr.smtptest, which is what MM3 uses in its test framework.
>
> https://edge.launchpad.net/lazr.smtptest
Thanks Barry,
That's helpful.
- --
Mark Sapiro The highway is for gamb
On Feb 20, 2010, at 01:27 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
>As I said, I think it would just be the config.pck. Everything else is
>open source software, but I don't think I want it. It's not that I'm not
>curious because I definitely am, but I don't want to accidentally send
>mail to any of the list member
On Feb 20, 2010, at 3:27 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> As I said, I think it would just be the config.pck. Everything else is
> open source software, but I don't think I want it. It's not that I'm not
> curious because I definitely am, but I don't want to accidentally send
> mail to any of the list mem
On 2/20/2010 12:56 PM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
>
> I fear I've got a decision to make here: To "fix" that problem, I'd
> normally simply export the recipient list and recreate the mailing
> list thereafter. But since we don't know what causes this behaviour, I
> can't be sure that my backups includ
On Feb 20, 2010, at 10:17 PM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
>> Have you tried any of the Postfix debugging strategies?
>>
>> http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html
>
>Yes he did.
>Stefan usually knows what he's doing :)
Ah, sorry about that!
culling-inbox-during-pycon-talk-ly y'rs,
-Barry
signatu
* Barry Warsaw :
> Have you tried any of the Postfix debugging strategies?
>
> http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html
Yes he did.
Stefan usually knows what he's doing :)
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Campus Benjamin Fr
On Feb 20, 2010, at 09:56 PM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
>I fear I've got a decision to make here: To "fix" that problem, I'd
>normally simply export the recipient list and recreate the mailing
>list thereafter. But since we don't know what causes this behaviour, I
>can't be sure that my backups inclu
* Stefan Foerster :
> I fear I've got a decision to make here: To "fix" that problem, I'd
> normally simply export the recipient list and recreate the mailing list
> thereafter.
Is this guaranteed to help?
Have you tried this?
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Ch
* Mark Sapiro :
> Does this delay occur uniformly over the entire list, or only within
> some group of recipients?
It occurs for all recipients, more or less - sometimes, it gets about
5 recipients done per second, but that's still far too slow.
> You could try running OutgoingRunner with Python'
On 2/20/2010 10:27 AM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
>
> Yes. From debuglevel(1) logs:
>
> Feb 20 19:03:15 2010 qrunner(7551): send: 'rcpt
> TO:\r\n'
> Feb 20 19:03:15 2010 qrunner(7551): reply: '250 2.1.5 Ok\r\n'
> Feb 20 19:03:15 2010 qrunner(7551): reply: retcode (250); Msg: 2.1.5 Ok
> Feb 20
* Mark Sapiro :
> On 2/20/2010 4:21 AM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
> So, without VERP or personalization, you should be seeing SMTP
> transactions that look like
>
> HELO
> response
> MAIL FROM
> response
> RCPT TO
> response
> (repeated for up to SMTP_MAX_RCPTS recipients)
> DATA
> response
>
On 2/20/2010 4:21 AM, Stefan Foerster wrote:
>
> For all other lists on this server, the conversation between Postfix
> and Mailman is very fast paced, but for that one list, it takes almost
> one second for a recipient to be specified (which is then acknowledged
> immediately by Postfix).
So, w
Hello world,
I have a very strange performance problem which only affects one small
announce-only list with approximately 11000 recipients: The smtp
logfile shows that it takes Mailman about 8400 seconds to deliver the
mails, which just doesn't make sense.
Setup: Mailman is configured to deliver
24 matches
Mail list logo
