Hello all...
I am running
qmail-1.03
RH 5.2
AMD 400
128 Mb
/ on 2GB IDE
/home on 6GB IDE
D-Link 530 TX PCI 10/100 NIC
1 qmail-smtp
1 qmail-pop3 (for normal pop3)
1 qmail-pop3 (for virtual domains using vchkpw)
At most I can have 180 users connected to the modems.
I am getting a lot of
Title: RE: Performance issues
That sounds like something completely unrelated to qmail on first hearing, but what message does the mailer give? For example sometimes my mailer will say cannot find the address but I click on details and it will give a completely and totally different response
Paul Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1 qmail-pop3 (for normal pop3)
1 qmail-pop3 (for virtual domains using vchkpw)
I am getting a lot of complaints from people saying they get "cannot find
mail.f-tech.net" when they check their mail (pop3).
Are these normal or virtual users?
What happens
On Thu, Aug 19, 1999 at 03:20:48PM -0400, Dave Sill wrote:
Paul Farber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or even turn off logging?
Are you using syslog (splogger)? Is it gobbling CPU time and/or I/O?
If so, switch to cyclog from daemontools (see LWQ). If not, it's
probably not a problem (yet).
On Wed, 28 Jul 1999 15:42:34 +0100, Alex at Star wrote:
Syslog is crap. Pure junk
We also saw a lot of our performance problems disappear when we moved from syslog to
cyclog
As has been pointed out before, a simple '-' before the maillog file
name in syslog.conf (see man page) will prevent
"Fred Lindberg" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As has been pointed out before, a simple '-' before the maillog file
name in syslog.conf (see man page) will prevent sync() after each
entry. This realizes most of the performance gains seen with cyclog.
Not all syslogs support that.
-Dave
://www.isys.ca
Fingerprint: 1683 001F A573 B6DF A074 0C96 DBE0 A070 28BE EEA5
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Reid Sutherland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 9:54 AM
Subject: Re: *sigh* performance issues again. Please help!
Woah! I think you may
://www.isys.ca
Fingerprint: 1683 001F A573 B6DF A074 0C96 DBE0 A070 28BE EEA5
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Reid Sutherland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 9:54 AM
Subject: Re: *sigh* performance issues again. Please help!
Woah! I think
Syslog is crap. Pure junk
We also saw a lot of our performance problems disappear when we moved from syslog to
cyclog
This message has been checked for all known viruses by the Star Screening System
My average concurrent remote went from 4 to 76. Nice.
-jeremy
Syslog is crap. Pure junk
We also saw a lot of our performance problems disappear when we moved from syslog to
cyclog
This message has been
We also saw a lot of our performance problems disappear when we moved =
from syslog to cyclog
What do you do about daily or weekly log summaries? I still haven't
come up with a good way to do that with cyclog.
--
John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 387 6869
[EMAIL
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John R. Levine)
Date: 28 Jul 1999 11:22:56 -0400
We also saw a lot of our performance problems disappear when we moved =
from syslog to cyclog
What do you do about daily or weekly log summaries? I still haven't
come up with a good way to do that with cyclog.
What do you do about daily or weekly log summaries? I still haven't
come up with a good way to do that with cyclog.
We parse the logs into a database, and then use the database to pull out any info we
want
This
John R. Levine writes:
We also saw a lot of our performance problems disappear when we moved =
from syslog to cyclog
What do you do about daily or weekly log summaries? I still haven't
come up with a good way to do that with cyclog.
You could probably adapt my mrtg code. It gathers
On Wed, Jul 28, 1999 at 11:22:56AM -0400, John R. Levine wrote:
We also saw a lot of our performance problems disappear when we moved =
from syslog to cyclog
What do you do about daily or weekly log summaries? I still haven't
come up with a good way to do that with cyclog.
I specifically
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[After switching from syslog to cyclog] My average concurrent remote
went from 4 to 76. Nice.
Remember when I told you to run ps/top/iostat/vmstat, and you said
they were all normal? Guess what? You were wrong. You should have seen
syslogd consuming large chunks of
Doug Lumpkin writes:
Where might this mrtg config file be???
Before everybody else asks me, http://www.crynwr.com/mrtg/ . I don't
have an index file, so you can see everything. qmail-mrtg and
qmail-mrtg1 are the scripts mentioned in mrtg.cfg. The two html files
are the mrtg displays.
--
On Wed, Jul 28, 1999 at 10:32:00AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This my friend so far seems to be the answer. I'm using Bruce Guentner's
qlogtools, qfilelog and this is the first time I've seen my
Where can I find these? qmail.org doesn't mention
either Guentner nor qlog.
This my friend so far seems to be the answer. I'm using Bruce Guentner's
qlogtools, qfilelog and this is the first time I've seen my
concurrentremote's fill up to its limit. I'm currently pumping out about
100 - 150 emails a second, at least from watching the qstat.
Did you mean 100 - 150
On Wed, Jul 28, 1999 at 10:27:36PM +0300, Tommi Virtanen wrote:
This my friend so far seems to be the answer. I'm using Bruce Guentner's
qlogtools, qfilelog and this is the first time I've seen my
Where can I find these? qmail.org doesn't mention
either Guentner nor qlog.
On Wed, Jul 28, 1999 at 11:24:06AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I specifically remember that there was a cyclog modification which
allowed one to process a log file which was being rotated out rather
than just unlinking it.
I wrote one such patch. The patch is in:
On 28 Jul 1999 11:22:56 -0400,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John R. Levine) said:
J What do you do about daily or weekly log summaries? I still haven't
J come up with a good way to do that with cyclog.
I munged some of the cyclog code around to make it write to a file based
on the current date.
I don't know why or what's wrong, but I'll tell you what I'm seeing.
I have vanilla qmail, with the big todo patch installed and split boosted
up to 231. Smtp is receiving about 150,000 emails a day and it's taking
qmail about 24 hours to get through this amount of mail.
The group of people
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have vanilla qmail, with the big todo patch installed and split boosted
up to 231. Smtp is receiving about 150,000 emails a day and it's taking
qmail about 24 hours to get through this amount of mail.
I'm running out of options. I'd like to see qmail do well here,
Cool. I'll do both.
Thanks
-jeremy
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have vanilla qmail, with the big todo patch installed and split boosted
up to 231. Smtp is receiving about 150,000 emails a day and it's taking
qmail about 24 hours to get through this amount of mail.
I'm running out of
Completed messages: 3580
Recipients for completed messages: 3580
Total delivery attempts for completed messages: 3580
Average delivery attempts per completed message: 1
Bytes in completed messages: 48327448
Bytes weighted by success: 48327448
Average message qtime (s): 3.49601
Total delivery
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Completed messages: 3580
Recipients for completed messages: 3580
Total delivery attempts for completed messages: 3580
Average delivery attempts per completed message: 1
Bytes in completed messages: 48327448
Bytes weighted by success: 48327448
Average message qtime (s):
27 matches
Mail list logo
