We something similar for a client a while ago. They are now mailing their
newsletters out at a rate of 150,000/hour with two machines. The trick is
to use qmail-remote directly and only queue stuff that doesn't get out the
first try.
Dirk
On Fri, Jun 04, 1999 at 01:04:25PM -0700, Mylo
You count or measure system load... that's part of the scripts that you need to
create to feed into the qmail-remotes.
Dirk
On Fri, Jun 04, 1999 at 03:17:33PM -0700, Mylo wrote:
> That's sounding happy, but how do you limit the number of qmail-remote's that are
> gonna get
We something similar for a client a while ago. They are now mailing their
newsletters out at a rate of 150,000/hour with two machines. The trick is
to use qmail-remote directly and only queue stuff that doesn't get out the
first try.
Dirk
On Fri, Jun 04, 1999 at 01:04:25PM -0700, Mylo
A client of ours sends out their newsletter at a rate of about
40,000/hour. Keep in mind that these are personalized, rather
large but fed directly into qmail-queue. That's 960,000 in
24 hours.
Dirk
On Wed, Dec 23, 1998 at 05:14:58PM -0500, Roger Merchberger wrote:
> Once upon a midnigh
Carefull, 255 = , 256=0001
Dirk
On Sat, Feb 13, 1999 at 03:47:58PM -0500, Tim Pierce wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 1999 at 06:37:22PM +0800, Marlon Anthony Abao wrote:
> > hello,
> >
> > with the release of the new linux kernel, the limit of concurrent
> &
Ahmm. Oops. Yes, my 256 should have been a 257.
Dirk
On Sat, Feb 13, 1999 at 05:23:04PM -0800, Mike Holling wrote:
> > Carefull, 255 = , 256=0001
>
> 256 = 0001
> 257 = 0001 0001
>
> - Mike
>
We have seen the same thing.
Dirk
On Tue, Dec 29, 1998 at 09:28:47AM +1100, brett wrote:
>
> A For Your Information re-post :)
>
> Brett Morgan
>
> - Forwarded message from Nelson Bunker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
>
> X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2
We are seeing performance numbers that are pretty close. About
two thirds of what Dan reports.
Dirk
On Wed, Jan 13, 1999 at 11:54:04AM -0500, Joe Garcia wrote:
> Is there any place that I can get some performance numbers besides what Dan
> has. My boss says that these are probabl
have?
That particular box is connected to a 100Mbit network (located at Exodus)
> Running a local nameserver?
yes
> >with SCSI drives. Anybody know a better/faster way?
>
> Multiple servers? RAM disk? qmail 2.0?
/tmp is on a RAM disk
Is qmail 2.0 out?
Dirk
> -Dave
Each message is personalized to the recipient. They truly are 230,000
different messages. That why it is fed into the queue.
Dirk
On Thu, Apr 08, 1999 at 01:12:58PM -0700, Mark Delany wrote:
> Ug. You're invoking qmail-queue for each recipient? Is that necessary?
>
> Most
What kind of speed improvement are you seeing?
dirk
On Thu, Apr 08, 1999 at 06:16:17PM -0400, David Villeger wrote:
> At 05:13 PM 4/8/99 -0400, David Villeger wrote:
> >Then, I did it with qmail-queue: qmail-send did not like it (got something
> >like "Sorry, message has wr
ents.
But maybe I'm not understanding what you mean by
"misrepresented your question" or "sanitizing" the code?
Dirk
On Thu, Apr 08, 1999 at 09:13:00PM -0700, Mark Delany wrote:
> At 04:06 PM Thursday 4/8/99, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Each message is personali
Yes and yes. I should have made that clearer from the beginning.
No prob.
Dirk
On Thu, Apr 08, 1999 at 10:00:15PM -0700, Mark Delany wrote:
> And er, you send this on a regular basis and that's the only unique aspect
> of the email?
>
> If that is the case, then my apologi
I'm running 2.2.5. No problem so far.
Dirk
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 12:47:32AM -0400, Joe Junkin wrote:
> Hi all.
> I have had my qmail server running without hitch on the linux 2.0.36 and then
> 2.2.0 for some time.
> Absolutely flawless.
> Last thursday I reloaded my server
ected to a 100Mbit network (located at Exodus)
>
> Is that 100Mb local or Internet?
100Mbit Internet.
> >> Multiple servers? RAM disk? qmail 2.0?
> >
> >/tmp is on a RAM disk
>
> I was thinking in terms of putting the queue on a Quantum Solid State
> Disk (http://www.quantum.com/products/ssd/).
>
> >Is qmail 2.0 out?
>
> No, but it promises dramtically improved queue performance.
Do we have an ETA?
Dirk
> -Dave
ite my own "gattling gun" SMTP delivery thingy and just feed
messages to qmail that have problems.
Results will be reported back to the list.
Dirk
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 11:07:31AM -0400, Dave Sill wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >I need to find a way of doing >
200K messages per hour then we should be
able to do that as well when sending legit stuff!
Dirk
PS. Hehe... yes, I'm trying to provoke somebody into more
performance ;)
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 04:42:32PM +0200, Harald Hanche-Olsen wrote:
> + [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> |
Why is an observation an insult? Its just a pattern that I have
seen a few times. No big deal.
Anyways, my main concern is to get more speed out of this thing.
Computer hardware has reached quite amazing performance levels.
It is time that software catches up.
Dirk
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 03
.
Of course the problem could be solved by having 20 boxes do it in
parallel. But where is the fun in that. Also rack space goes for
$1000/rack/month where these boxes live. No need to waste money just
because they could. After all, finding cost effective solutions is what
they pay us for.
Dirk
O
qmail-inject is too slow. I've been using qmail-queue instead.
Dirk
On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 05:01:48PM -, Lorens Kockum wrote:
> On the qmail list [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >You can. Just make sure that you send a single email, with a CC list
> >of s
FYI
Removing the fsync calls results in a speedup of 25-40% for us.
Am now getting about 50K/hour on the PPRO200, 128MB RAM and
9GB UW HD. No bad but still quite a ways to go.
Next test will be multiple independent mail-queue's on RAM disks.
Dirk
PS: The faster system (PII 450) i
Somebody brought up the thought that tarpitting on the receiving end
might slow things down. Are there any stats on how many people use
tarpitting on their servers?
Dirk
You may want to have syslog log to a log host.
That way it doesn't fsync on your machine.
Dirk
On Sun, Apr 11, 1999 at 03:06:13PM -0400, Matthew Harrell wrote:
>
> Since we're on the subject of speed recently, is there a way limit the size of
> the message queue in qm
What are the advantages/disadvantages of cyclog over syslog?
Dirk
On Sun, Apr 11, 1999 at 04:15:05PM -0400, Adam D. McKenna wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 11, 1999 at 01:03:47PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > You may want to have syslog log to a log host.
> > That way it doesn&
How do I get off this list?
Dirk
On Fri, May 14, 1999 at 11:23:41AM +1000, Michael Mansour wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a client who attempts to email email addresses (he says any address
> he tries) and gets the following responses:
>
> The message could not be sent because one
Addresses are definetely not being dropped on the floor.
Russ, is your code available somewhere?
Dirk
On Thu, Dec 30, 1999 at 11:52:10PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Adam McKenna writes:
> > I thought everyone would enjoy knowing that Sony Pictures is using qmail
> > for
> grep -V
GNU grep version 2.0
What may cause the delay is a missing newline. Grep scans for lines
that match $TRIGGERS and a line seems to be defined as any number of
chars followed by a newline or eof. Now in the pipe there is no eof
and if the newline is missing grep will wait until the next line
arrives.
Dirk
is a boon to
> Solaris users to be sure (and a boon to Sun for that matter).
>
> I tend to look at paging simplistically in most cases. If you're paging out,
> then you're running short of memory, but one hopes that these:
Normal IO is using the page in/out mechanism. T
all
adresses in (from, to, cc, return-path) look still like
this: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I wan't to archieve that _all_ outgoing mails contain adresses
of the form [EMAIL PROTECTED], but _all_ possible local
deliveries (including root), won't leave the system.
Is this possible at all?
Puzzled,
Dirk
like netapp then what network speed is
> necesary to make that 500k mailserver running smoothly (i assume netapp
> uses nfs).
Yes NFS.
Depends. With multiple ethernet devices 100mbit full duplex should be
enough if the pop3 servers are properly distributed. A NetApp supports
gigabit ethernet if needed.
Dirk
this case and
write the bounce mail in the wrapper.
Patching qmail-smtpd would be better from this point of view.
Another solution could be to introduce a new environment variable
(QMAILSMTPBOUNCE) which if set forces (a minimally patched) qmail-smtpd
to bounce the message and e.g. write this variable's contents as
explanation to the user.
Any comments?
Thank you for listening.
Best regards,
Dirk
Thank you to all who responded.
> At 01:34 PM Thursday 3/25/99, Scott Schwartz wrote:
> >Dirk Alboth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >| As I understand RFC 822 this is not violating the standard but in this
> >| case a "Sender:" field should reveal th
> Dirk Alboth wrote/schrieb/scribsit:
>
> Here's what I do in similar cases, though it may not be applicable
> to your case: If you have a Samba server, you can get ident info
> from the smbstatus command.
Good idea. I actually did also think of this but in our si
ionport 54818
This is a working transfer (different Mail):
server -> client:
0110: 2e 64 65 0d 0a 0d 0a 74 65 73 74 2c 69 67 6e 6f .detest,igno
0120: 72 65 0d 0a 0d 0a 44 69 72 6b 0d 0a 2e 0d 0a reDirk.
IP-Packet from 192.76.144.44 to 192.168.1.2 pr
Hello all,
Where can I find some documents about how to
write program used by dot qmail to redirect mail.
Thanks a lot.
Dirk.Ye
2001/3/18
Hello all,
I write a program use C/C++ language, and put its path into a dot qmail file like
this:
|/path/to/my/program/getmailcontent
But I get nothing but headers. So I need urs help how to get the whole mail
content from
this environment.
Thanks a lot.
Dirk.ye
How do you identify an idiot during the signup process?
Dirk
On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 12:29:39PM -0400, Adam D. McKenna wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 1999 at 10:50:01AM -0400, Alex Miller wrote:
> > One difference:
> >
> > On this list it is permissable to send an email th
That would be after the signup process.
Dirk
On Thu, Jul 01, 1999 at 11:10:49PM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Dirk Harms-Merbitz writes:
> > How do you identify an idiot during the signup process?
>
> They respond to off-topic postings.
>
> --
> -russ nelson &
The main trick is to use qmail-remote directly. Only queue things when
delivery is not possible.
Dirk
On Tue, Jul 13, 1999 at 02:47:16PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I'm trying to tune qmail to deliver outgoing mail as fast as possible. We
> have a mail list with
Feed directly into qmail-remote, not qmail-queue. Only queue
when you abosolutely have to.
Dirk
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 08:04:44AM -0400, Matthew Harrell wrote:
>
> Okay, I'm trying to pull even more out of my qmail box. It's a dual P2 450
> with 256 MB of RAM and
2])".
The recipient computers are dumb enough to send their bounces to
the real mail.power.net.
This is a DOS because the innocent mail server a) gets millions of
bounces and b) might get black listed on various "anti-spam" lists.
Dirk
Received: from mail.power.net (unverified [209.26.1
ogram that does something like
this. We might as well turn bounces off now before that happens.
I don't think that it is the mail server's place to divulge
which addresses are valid and which are not.
Dirk
On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 03:18:25PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Pavel Kankovsky
dress then a directory service
should be used.
People know when people don't email messages.
Dirk
On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 08:26:32PM -0800, Racer X wrote:
> - Original Message -----
> From: "Dirk Harms-Merbitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
&
I have customers who regularly send 100+MB attachements.
Email is the most convenient way for them to do this.
Especially with a local SMTP server in their network.
Why waste time tyring to convince them otherwise?
Dirk
On Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 03:02:06PM -0500, Chris Hardie wrote:
> On
I would like to know as well.
Dirk
On Wed, May 17, 2000 at 06:54:34PM -0300, Frederiko dos Santos Costa wrote:
> How I do to leave this list ?
>
45 matches
Mail list logo
