On Thu, Apr 12, 2001 at 06:16:48PM -0400, Nick (Keith) Fish wrote:
> Peter van Dijk wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 04:24:54PM -0400, Nick (Keith) Fish wrote:
> > [snip]
> > > Sure. You could even run an entirely separate copy of qmail processes
> > > that interfaces with the same queue w
Peter van Dijk wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 04:24:54PM -0400, Nick (Keith) Fish wrote:
> [snip]
> > Sure. You could even run an entirely separate copy of qmail processes
> > that interfaces with the same queue when you send out the newsletter.
>
> What do you mean by 'the same queue'?
>
On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 04:24:54PM -0400, Nick (Keith) Fish wrote:
[snip]
> Sure. You could even run an entirely separate copy of qmail processes
> that interfaces with the same queue when you send out the newsletter.
What do you mean by 'the same queue'?
Greetz, Peter.
John P wrote:
>
> Hi All
>
> I've been looking into the best way to send the occasional one-off
> newsletter to 50-60,000 customers.
>
> Two questions:
> - For max. delivery speed, can I just up the concurrency-remote to, say, 400
> (applying patch) - do I need to do anything else (Linux RedHat
Hi All
I've been looking into the best way to send the occasional one-off
newsletter to 50-60,000 customers.
The e-mail addresses are stored in a MySQL database and I'm currently using
a PHP script which I can drop the HTML e-mail into which loops through using
PHP's mail() facility. It worked O
