anything to do with the stated
problem of remoteconcurrency.
You don't have to touch your qmail-smtpd configuration at all.
You do need to stop and restart qmail-send.
John White
with the number of concurrent remote
deliveries that qmail will do.
John White
traffic.
John White
On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 09:42:54AM +0200, Peter Klingeberg wrote:
How can I configure qmail to send the mail only once (per hop) with all
recipients in one Mail?
You can't.
John
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 12:30:52PM -0600, Roger Walker wrote:
Test with stock qmail on a Solaris workstation, 10,000 copies sent
to the same email address (obviously the same domain) using qmail-inject:
30 minutes.
Test from same workstation with a script to generate 10,000
...
However, and interesting read.
John White
still would explore
FreeBSD performance first.
John White
On Fri, Jan 19, 2001 at 04:59:33PM -0500, Steve Fulton wrote:
I've searched the archives extensively, and I've learned quite a lot, but
I'd like advice on this question:
Assuming RAID 1+0 is not an option (due to the expense), what level of
RAID is best for storing /Maildir's on a file
On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 06:48:51AM -0400, Michael Cunningham wrote:
I have a qmail server that is running on a Sun Netra T1
(solaris 2.6). Its receiving about 300-500k emails per day.
Unfortunatly it appears to be dieing a VERY quick death.
The IO loads on the disk are huge and I need up
On Sun, Sep 24, 2000 at 04:59:24PM -0700, John White wrote:
1) Make sure you're using cyclog instead of splogger. splogger
uses syslog, which can definitely slow down your system.
Of course I meant multilog in the most recent daemontools package.
John
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000 at 04:56:28PM -0400, Nathan J. Mehl wrote:
In the immortal words of John White ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
However, I question the decision to use Solaris x86. I'm not aware
of any advantage there is over something like Linux or xBSD.
Three words: journalling file system
Better OS gurus than I can comment on exactly how Solaris bloats
network processes.
All I'll say is that qmail still performs admirably on the Solaris
latform.
However, I question the decision to use Solaris x86. I'm not aware
of any advantage there is over something like Linux or xBSD.
John
r up those points?
John White
connection outage, or whether
having the mail at a single qmail server which would require
the network connection being up to check mail.
In other words, you seem to have a specific path of delivery
in mind. What the hell is it?
Hint:
smtp and pop3 are not valid answers.
John White
Anyone noticed a spike in the last month in spam from Network
Solutions?
I'm thinking about adding some of their domains to my badmailfrom
as neither orbs nor maps seems to be blocking this spam.
Anyone paying better attention than I to the source of this spam?
John
directories created with useradd -m will
have Maildir's created by default. That is to say, it's not
retroactive. :)
John White
On Thu, Aug 10, 2000 at 11:49:56PM +0200, Einar Bordewich wrote:
Well, on a mailing list server where 1000+ mails is going out you will
occupy all remote resources (?) and keep the server bussy for a while. But
on a dedicated mailinglist server you don't have (well, at least not me)
single
On Thu, Aug 10, 2000 at 02:17:11PM -0500, Eric Long wrote:
1. Mail list server has 500 identical e-mails to send.
2. It gives that list of addresses to the mailserver, along with the e-mail
message.
3. The mailserver then contacts teh first server on teh list, says "here's
an e-mail
On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 02:53:36PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just put the domains in rcpthosts and either have a single all domains
entry or define the specific domains which must be forwarded in the
smtproutes file. This way, the qmail box becomes the main MX where all mail
goes
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 11:05:18AM -0700, Jacob Scott wrote:
I would like to bounce all mail incoming to my qmail machine (which is
qmail.domain.com) for domain.com to mail.domain.com while i set up my
server. What would this look like in smtproutes? I don't see this file in my
control
On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 09:35:36PM +0200, Toens Bueker wrote:
Reassured I installed the patched version with all the
nice features (conf-spawn=2045, conf-split=521) - Success
- no error.
On the Solaris 7 platforms, do you
make setup check
after you change conf-spawn and conf-split?
John
On Sat, Jul 22, 2000 at 12:45:57PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
o DNS overhead is not counted
I'm still not clear why this isn't counted. I mean, it -is-
part of the traffic, is it not? Is it your contention that
there's no difference in the dns traffic between the two
methods?
John
On Sat, Jul 22, 2000 at 12:45:57PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
o Aggregation is by FQDN, not MX target
Again, why? I thought the whole argument was to trade speed for
"network good-neighbor"-ness.
John
On Sat, Jul 22, 2000 at 08:07:11AM -0400, Michael T. Babcock wrote:
John White wrote:
To be blunt, I don't mind taking a look at the code changes you're
proposing. Where are they?
(Sarcasm:) What, you don't know how to code?
No, but I'm skeptical about ideas that are so good
On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 01:33:34PM +0200, Lars Brandi Jensen wrote:
I have tried to telnet to port 25 ( telnet 10.1.x.x 25 ) locally and it
works fine. I have send and recived mails locally and it works out fine.
I have send mails outside my net and it works fine. But to recieve mails
from
On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 09:18:42AM -0400, Greg Owen wrote:
If I want to mailbomb foo.com, and bar.com is running qmail, then I
can connect to bar.com's mail and say:
mail from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (not me, my victim)
rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (presumed not to exist, will
On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 09:59:35AM -0400, Mark Mentovai wrote:
qmail-send's behavior for remote deliveries (which includes how it deals
with qmail-rspawn and qmail-remote) is something that's bothered me for a
while. The system really should manage remote deliveries better. At
present, we
On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 10:30:41AM -0400, Mark Mentovai wrote:
That's very easy on a host-by-host basis, and I use it for certain setups.
The problem is that there shouldn't be any "domain in question," an MTA
should make efficient use of a limited number of SMTP sessions when
transferring
On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 11:20:00AM -0400, Michael T. Babcock wrote:
No, but if qmail is making the deliveries to another MTA, that MTA doesn't
have much choice about whether its going to accept deliveries from Qmail or
not, so why not make Qmail a nice neighbour while we're at it?
What are
On Fri, Jul 21, 2000 at 11:23:45AM -0400, Mark Mentovai wrote:
How is this accumulation supposed to occur? Per queue injection?
Over a time period? How long of a time period? As long as we're
being good neighbors, should the mta lookup the mx for each
recipient and accumulate by mx? What
On Mon, Jul 17, 2000 at 10:29:03AM -0500, Austad, Jay wrote:
With all of the emails I recieved, I get the impression that I'm going to
I/O bound instead of processor or memory bound.
Ahhh... someone who gets it.
How much disk will be sufficient for the queue? 1GB? More?
What if you did
On Fri, Jul 14, 2000 at 12:21:57PM -0700, Jason Murphy wrote:
The machine I built contains a DPT SmartRAID V SCSI RAID 0/1/5 controller
with 5 1RPM 9.1 gig drives. The thing I notice about RAID 5 in the
right configuration is that you can throw tons of IO at it and you will
see little
On Thu, Jun 29, 2000 at 12:55:56PM -0700, Ihnen, David wrote:
This prompted a bit of research. Why didn't it work? My boss wanted
to know too. I found a message on this list where a man states that
qmail queues cannot be located over NFS.
My question is Why? they use maildir, so they
On Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 12:54:08AM -0700, Peter Chi-Lung Yiu wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Subject: Draft Predictions
Date: Monday, June 26, 2000 8:04 PM
PGage writes...
snip
or 1 would still be available, we should take him, but if the talent level is
roughly equal, I would
On Tue, Jun 27, 2000 at 01:30:14AM -0700, John White wrote:
Gold and Forum Blue.
And mistaken addressing.
John
On Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 11:55:30AM +1000, Brett Randall wrote:
Normally I'd just say 'man qmail-send' since you haven't done this but since
it isn't THAT explicit with examples for the virtualdomains file I will let
you off.
However, I believe the FAQ is -quite- explicit in it's examples,
Set up aliases for the various selections, dropping them into
local Maildir's.
Then use serialmail's maildirsmtp to route the maildir to whatever
smtp server you want.
John
On Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 10:10:35AM -0400, Dave Sill wrote:
Jonathan Maier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How do I take bounced mail and redeliver it every 60 minutes for 4 hours?
What file(s) are these variables created in?
Huh? Bounced mail is returned to the sender as undeliverable. You want
On Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 06:01:11PM +0200, Abdul Rehman Gani wrote:
I have successfully installed qmail + vpopmail + qmailadmin on OpenBSD 2.6.
Everything works fine, but I have some questions related to tuning/managing
qmail:-
1. How do I restrict multiple simultaneous connections to a
On Mon, May 15, 2000 at 05:09:46PM +0800, Michael Boman wrote:
A server goes down that resolvs in global or local downtime (ok, the
box itself is down, but the mail should been taken care of by another
server without we need to plug the raid-set into another box). We
should be able to say:
On a mailing list I administer, bounces from a subscriber go
to the person in the From: header. The subscriber is from
leisureworld.org, who's mx is mail.pajo.com
bash-2.03$ telnet mail.pajo.com 25
Trying 216.116.96.4...
Connected to mail.pajo.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 mail.pajo.com
On Sat, May 13, 2000 at 10:02:24PM +0800, Michael Boman wrote:
What I want is to be able to share the queue between n+2 servers on each
loocation as well as be able to split a single domain's mailstorage so each
users doesn't need to download his/hers email from the other end of the world.
On Fri, May 12, 2000 at 03:43:39PM +0800, Michael Boman wrote:
Share queue between servers: It is _not_ acceptable that if one of the servers
dies (as in start burnin etc.. ie: a non-recoverble error) the mail that was in
that queue is gone forever. We _must_ be able to put the queue on a
On Fri, May 12, 2000 at 01:17:19AM -0700, Bob Brown wrote:
Is there a tool to trace where it's getting lost?
There should be. You're looking at the smtpd logs, which show
that an smtp connection existed. That's a start. How are you
doing your logging.
do you have a
/var/log/qmail/
or
On Fri, May 12, 2000 at 12:40:28AM -0600, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
On Thu, May 11, 2000 at 10:54:37PM -0700, John White wrote:
If you're looking for queue speed, you want RAID 1+0 with a
NVRAM cache to accellerate the small block writes.
zeroseek would be even cooler.
Don't use zeroseek
On Thu, May 11, 2000 at 09:01:27AM -0400, Steve Craft wrote:
To throw my $.02 at this issue, if this is looking like a "low level" speed
issue, why not tinker with the hardware? Taking the two disks that hold
/var and putting them on a RAID0 set should give you a serious speed boost
without
On Sun, May 07, 2000 at 06:08:08PM -0700, Derek Briggs wrote:
The Lakers are very fortunate not to face a healthy SA. Duncan presents most
of the same problems as Webber offensively, plus he's better defensively.
Robinson is tougher than Vlade. And Avery Johnson isn't an idiot like
On Sat, May 06, 2000 at 04:30:54PM -0400, Len Budney wrote:
(BTW blocking DUL has not interfered with my own email in a couple of
years now. So despite the big talk of folks who use it, I continue to
send mail directly from my machine. DUL blocking only works because it
is a rarely-taken
On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 05:51:46PM -0700, Jon Rust wrote:
At 2:43 AM +0200 5/5/00, Peter van Dijk wrote:
So much for security, eh?
Hrmf. You have apoint there. :-/ Guess I should think before typing.
Of course, by limiting the range of IPs allowed to trigger the
download, you could
On Tue, May 02, 2000 at 12:25:14PM -0500, Jeff Hayward wrote:
On Tue, 2 May 2000, Gareth Harper wrote:
1) His first requirement was to only allow relaying if the user had one
of his hosted domains as the From: line of an email. I've told him what
a bad idea this is but there's no
Anyone manage Lotus Notes on their Enterprise?
I'm wondering if it's possible to use the groupware features
(shared calendar, etc) of Notes while maintaining qmail as
the smtp and pop server...
John
On Thu, Apr 20, 2000 at 10:41:43AM +0530, Madhav wrote:
hi all,
i am planning to load balance my mail service using 2 servers. my proposed
set up is going to be something like the following,
| --- Mach1 ---|
Mail clients --- Router1 |
On Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 01:26:07AM -0200, Manuel Lemos wrote:
Hello John,
On 12-Apr-00 02:05:12, you wrote:
On Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 12:50:41AM -0200, Manuel Lemos wrote:
Do you mean there is no way to determine wether the SMTP server supports
VERP?
Of course there is. You can tell
On Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 12:07:09AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
Manuel Lemos [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Maybe I am missing here something that is simpler than I think but that
still doesn't answer my basic question: what SMTP command sequence do I
need to use to enable VERP on message
On Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 04:57:37AM +, Juan E Suris wrote:
John White writes:
BTW, when you're ready to scale, check out cubix for their SBC based
chassis. 8 machines in 7U! Add redundant power, a layer 4 switch,
and a multi-host RAID 1+0 to act as the queue, and you're cooking
On Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 03:10:14AM -0700, John White wrote:
FROM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Of course that's
MAIL FROM:
and
RCPT TO:
John
On Tue, Apr 11, 2000 at 04:29:23PM -0400, Jeff Commando Sherwin wrote:
Right. I don't see much point in it then for inbound SMTP. Let the DNS and
MX prefs do the job they were designed to do. IP address space isn't *that*
expensive.
its just that our current situation does not yeild
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.
It's interesting that you're using ReiserFS. Are you doing
that for /var/qmail/queue?
At
On Thu, Mar 16, 2000 at 08:34:09PM -, Gabriel Ambuehl wrote:
I'm searching for an easy solution to operate two servers using qmail that
have both the exact same mails on them (so some kind of mirroring) to ensure
the mails don't get killed when one server fails. I understand, that this is
On Wed, Feb 16, 2000 at 03:27:14PM -0800, Matt Harrington wrote:
i want to move /var to RAID (software RAID with
FreeBSD's "vinum"). i'd like a sanity check on what i
plan to do:
Not sure what RAID level you're using. However, unless it's
RAID1+0, you're increasing the first bottleneck
On Wed, Feb 09, 2000 at 11:22:20AM -0800, kevin olson wrote:
sorry to throw such primitive questions inbetween all
these expert posts, but
a.does tinydns/dnscache run on solaris? if so does
anyone here use it on a sparc?
I'm using the dnscache server on a sparc, but I compiled
If I understand correctly, you don't need to plan bandwidth for
web browsing, as that goes through the dial-in provider, but
you do need to plan for smtp bandwidth, as that's in-house?
I'm reading page 33 of the Jan 31, 2000 Netword World magazine,
which has an article quoting stats from Ferris
/var/log/qmail-pop3d
Any ideas?
John White
On Wed, Jan 26, 2000 at 04:23:59PM -0500, Nathan J. Mehl wrote:
Anybody got any sample maildir delivery code in perl lying about that
I could snarf? A quick scan of CPAN revealed nothing of any use.
http://search.cpan.org/doc/KJOHNSON/MailFolder-0.07/Mail/Folder/Maildir.pm
John White
ou have to define whether it's the incoming or outgoing
message load which you have to balance. Second, you have to realize
that none of the solutions which will help you solve your problem
will involve sharing a "queue" between multiple instanciations of
qmail. Each instance will have its own queue.
John White
On Fri, Jan 21, 2000 at 12:36:15PM +0800, Michael Boman wrote:
I've seen someone post a question like this but didnt get a decent answer.
I am looking into hosting a mailservice that will handle around 1-3
million SMTP transactions per day. What kind of hardware do I need to
manage that?
On Fri, Dec 10, 1999 at 04:54:31PM +0100, Ekker, Heinz wrote:
When I first tested it, I used alias-expansion with the fastforward-package,
and to be honest, I was quite surprised to find that qmail could - on a
Pentium III 500 with 512 Megs RAM and a 19GB Level 1-RAID running RedHat,
2.2.13
Has anyone familiar with the Informix database engine thought about
using multilog to assist with the management of Informix physical
and logical logs?
Just curious...
John White
On Mon, Nov 22, 1999 at 09:45:52AM +, John P . Looney wrote:
On Fri, Nov 19, 1999 at 03:18:37PM -0800, John White mentioned:
Slowing down the writes to the queue is a bad thing. The queue is
constantly being sync'ed.
But I thought that messages were all stored in separate files
On Tue, Nov 23, 1999 at 02:04:50AM +, Florian G. Pflug wrote:
Or perhaps you don't know? HW RAID controllers can come with non-volitile
RAM caches. When part of this cache is in "writeback" mode, scsi write
commands are put in the cache, and the controller tells the OS that the
On Mon, Nov 22, 1999 at 03:47:47PM -0800, Racer X wrote:
read the message again, specifically the part about "non-volatile."
Oh right. How he spelled it.
hardware raid is a different beast entirely, particularly when you're
talking about stuff that has battery backed caches. i still don't
I understand the motivation David, I really do. But you don't
seem to understand who qmail works.
On Mon, Nov 08, 1999 at 09:12:48PM +, David L. Nicol wrote:
What the people with the problem are asking for appears to
be for qmail to not split up identical mails intended for
multiple
On Mon, Nov 08, 1999 at 11:24:23PM +, David L. Nicol wrote:
John White flamed forth:
man pages indicate ... that qmail-remote "sends the message
to one or more recipients at a remote host." Which means that
it still hasn't been split up when qmail-r
On Thu, Nov 18, 1999 at 07:36:17PM -0800, Michael Boyiazis wrote:
We are thinking of using OpenDiskSuite to
mirror a disk which contains /var/qmail so that
if the disk dies we have (hopefully) not lost the
mail in the queue. Will this work?
Would I then need to run the queue
On Fri, Nov 19, 1999 at 09:57:44AM -0800, Matthew Brown wrote:
John White wrote:
IMHO, no software mirroring scheme is going to do the trick. AND
they're overwhelmingly expensive.
As to the latter point, isn't DiskSuite included in your Solaris license
these days?
No. One has to buy
On Fri, Nov 19, 1999 at 03:25:43PM -0800, John White wrote:
On the former point: why is such a huge proportion of the world doing their
mirroring with software RAID (generally Veritas) including some HUGE solaris
installations (Sun seems quite keen on Veritas).
Probably because those
76 matches
Mail list logo
