On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > btw, for those interested, we've now benchmarked Xmail vs. Post.Office, > Imail, and MDaemon, and have found that it handles loads and scales > better than any of those products.
I wouldn't want to lack of modesty, but I'm not really surprised about this :) > I have noticed one thing, though, which is not really relevant, but > piqued my curiosity: > > The only thing that I've noticed that is "slower" is the initial POP3 > banner.... in other words, Xmail takes considerably longer to bring up > the initial POP3 banner after a connection on Port 110. The actual POP3 > session, though, is at least as fast if not faster (we don't have a lot > of POP3 users so I can't benchmark load well for POP3) than other > products. > > Any idea why that initial POP3 delay occurs? DNS resolution of the local interface. When XMail accepts a POP3 connection on a local interface, it tries to get the name of the interface. Try to put it inside your hosts file. > Also, I'd appreciate a brief note on the issue of the spool queue number > from an architectural point of view.... why does it create a structure > like /spool/number/number instead of just partitioning into > /spool/number? I can guess you're creating multiple inner queues, but > why? Is it to allow for multiple threads to process queues > independently? No, its to handle a greater number of spool files. Have you ever tried to stock more than 40-50000 files inside a directory ? FS performance suck. - Davide - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
