Hi,
I'm experimenting with qmail's throughput. It approximates what
we want to do with it. (send mail from a mail database through qmail-inject)
I want to see how fast qmail will queue messages.
I have a ~433 Mhz Alpha.
Experiment:
script that runs qmail-inject 1000 times
w
There was some discussion on the throughput per day of qmail on a
FreeBSD Pentium. Is it on a web page?
Thanks,
John
--
John Conover, 631 Lamont Ct., Campbell, CA., 95008, USA.
VOX 408.370.2688, FAX 408.379.9602, whois '!JC154'
[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www2.inow.com/~conover/
There is something very wrong here. Cat'ing two blocks of data should
take milliseconds. Are you out of memory (does vmstat show paging?)?
When your cat is << .1 seconds or so then rerun your tests. Wait a
minute, did you run the cat WHILE you were trying to do the deliveries?
If so, then that is
At 12:28 PM Thursday 8/5/99, Daemeon Reiydelle wrote:
>There is something very wrong here. Cat'ing two blocks of data should
>take milliseconds. Are you out of memory (does vmstat show paging?)?
I though he mentioned that he ran it 1000 times and thus the numbers reflect
a 1000 invocations...
At 01:56 PM Thursday 8/5/99, Jim Arnott wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I'm experimenting with qmail's throughput. It approximates what
>we want to do with it. (send mail from a mail database through qmail-inject)
>I want to see how fast qmail will queue messages.
>
>I have a ~433 Mhz Alpha.
>
>Experiment:
>
>
Hi,
I meant the "cat >> out.file < 1000byte.in" was done in a 1000 time loop.
#vmstat 1 (during inject test):
Virtual Memory Statistics: (pagesize = 8192)
procsmemory pages intrcpu
r w u act free wire fault cow zero react pin pout in
>
> At 01:56 PM Thursday 8/5/99, Jim Arnott wrote:
>
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >I'm experimenting with qmail's throughput. It approximates what
> >we want to do with it. (send mail from a mail database through qmail-inject)
> >I want to see how fast qmail will queue messages.
> >
> >I have a ~433 Mhz Al
At 03:53 PM Thursday 8/5/99, Jim Arnott wrote:
> > >I have a ~433 Mhz Alpha.
> > >
> > >Experiment:
> > >
> > > script that runs qmail-inject 1000 times
> > > with a 1000 byte body
> > > Qmail-send is not running
> > >
> > >Result:
> > > takes 73 seconds (13.7/sec)
Jim Arnott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 5 August 1999 at 15:53:53 -0500
> IMHO it seems that there is somthing strange going on when while doing the
> inject test the CPU is 70% idle. (cat test is 0% idle). There seems
> to be a bottleneck somewhere.
That's fairly normal; queue disk bandwid
[snip]
> Their is *always* a "bottleneck" in every test. A bottleneck is absolutely
> normal.
>
> In our line of work, it is typically a cpu or or disk bottleneck, depending
> on the nature of the program involved.
[snip]
You have to learn to use your systems performance monitering tools AND
ho
Please review the man page for vmstats. You may find it helpful to buy
and read any of the books on UNIX performance tuning (the ones on
Solaris tuning would be most usefull). Your swap file is in serious
contention with your processes since you are badly over committed. You
might also want to red
On Thu, Aug 05, 1999 at 01:56:02PM -0500, Jim Arnott wrote:
> Experiment:
>
> script that runs qmail-inject 1000 times
> with a 1000 byte body
> Qmail-send is not running
>
> Result:
> takes 73 seconds (13.7/sec)
>
> This seems a little slow to me. The system cpu is 70%
On Thu, Aug 05, 1999 at 01:56:02PM -0500, Jim Arnott wrote:
> Experiment:
>
> script that runs qmail-inject 1000 times
> with a 1000 byte body
> Qmail-send is not running
>
> Result:
> takes 73 seconds (13.7/sec)
>
> This seems a little slow to me. The system cpu is 70%
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Experiment:
>
> script that runs qmail-inject 1000 times
> with a 1000 byte body
> Qmail-send is not running
>
> Result:
> takes 73 seconds (13.7/sec)
>
> This seems a little slow to me. The system cpu is 70% idle.
What processes are taking
All,
Thanks for all your help and pointers. Looks like its the disk bandwith. When I
take out the fsync's in qmail-queue it drops down to 24 seconds (41.6/sec).
SUMMARY:
Could only inject a 1000 byte file into the queue at a rate of 13.6/sec.
On a ~433 Alpha with Digital UNIX 4.0.
CONCLUSION:
How do you do this with Qmail? Isn't that what Sendmail does?
> Another way is to make an initial attempt to deliver the message
> directly, before queueing it. Since some fairly large proportion of
> messages go through on the first try (depends a lot on your address
> mix, but 50% to 95%),
-
From: Jim Arnott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 06, 1999 10:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Qmail throughput
All,
Thanks for all your help and pointers. Looks like its the disk bandwith.
When I
take out the fsync's in qmail-queue it drops down to 24 seconds
On Fri, Aug 06, 1999, Jim Arnott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks for all your help and pointers. Looks like its the disk bandwith. When I
> take out the fsync's in qmail-queue it drops down to 24 seconds (41.6/sec).
>
> SUMMARY:
>
> Could only inject a 1000 byte file into the queue at a r
> On Fri, Aug 06, 1999, Jim Arnott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for all your help and pointers. Looks like its the disk bandwith.
When I
> > take out the fsync's in qmail-queue it drops down to 24 seconds (41.6/sec).
> >
> > SUMMARY:
> >
> > Could only inject a 1000 byte file int
On Fri, 6 Aug 1999, Jim Arnott wrote:
> CONCLUSION:
> The queue is very disk intensive and all writes are fsync'ed.
they are supposed to be! anything else risks you loosing messages if the
system crashes
> Things to try:
>
> (thanks to David Dyer-Bennet,Daemeon Reiydelle, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>
On Fri, 6 Aug 1999, Victor Tavares wrote:
>
> How do you do this with Qmail? Isn't that what Sendmail does?
>
>
> > Another way is to make an initial attempt to deliver the message
> > directly, before queueing it. Since some fairly large proportion of
> > messages go through on the first tr
> On Fri, 6 Aug 1999, Jim Arnott wrote:
>
> > CONCLUSION:
> > The queue is very disk intensive and all writes are fsync'ed.
>
> they are supposed to be! anything else risks you loosing messages if the
> system crashes
> > Things to try:
> >
> > (thanks to David Dyer-Bennet,Daemeon Reiydelle,
22 matches
Mail list logo
