hello, 2007/9/27, Jethro R Binks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > From time to time I get asked some variant of "how many emails do the > University systems reject?" (meaning at the MXs).
For the actual number of delivered messages I find isoqlog helpful. But unfortunately isoqlog will not show you how many connections there were. HTH Zbigniew Szalbot > > My problem is that I never really know how to answer that accurately and > meaningfully. I run eximstats over the consolidated logs from the MXs, > which gives me a report. I get a count of connections made, and some of > those will get through and cause emails to be delivered, and others will > be rejected, at HELO time or RCPT time or DATA time as seems appropriate > for efficiency or best information purposes (The report gives a breakdown > of the reasons for rejections through the use of custom patterns looking > for strings set with log_message per acl clause). Some connections may > just be shed off through the use of imposed SMTP delays and I never get > any more information than the remote IP. > > The problem is, of course, that a connection could deliver one or more > email messages, and one email message may be addressed to one or more > recipients. This makes a direct comparison of connections vs deliveries > difficult. > > It's also hard to say whether a message for two recipients is one or two > emails. The MTA transports it as one message, but on a traditional (Unix) > email system a copy may get delivered to each recipient, so does it then > become two messages? On the other hand, if delivery is to a modern > 'database' message store, like Exchange, in some cases at least, I think I > am right in saying there is just one 'copy' of the message in the > database, and each user just receives a pointer to it from their inbox. > In either case, I imagine each user would count the copy of the message in > their own inbox as separate from the one in another recipients inbox - > each 'copy' is viewed as a unique message. > > For the purposes of the report request, I usually end up giving the > relevant numbers with units, and include a rider saying that direct > comparisons of the numbers could be misleading with a brief explanation. > > I just wondered if anyone had any neat ways of summarising this, or > resolving the issue of mismatched units (# connections vs # messages vs # > recipients). Or just calculate a converstion factor for '# messages > delivered from a connection' and multiply up, and not trouble whoever is > asking with the detail. Or perhaps I'm missing something obvious. > > Jethro. > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > Jethro R Binks > Computing Officer, IT Services > University Of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK > > -- > ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users > ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ > ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/ > -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
