>Yeah i know, i was just using this for a comparison purpose of low memory to
>high memory.
ha, a trick question!! vbg
The server would only be sending out mail. Clients don't access the server at
>all. It's a machine that is gonna essentially mail out updates every night.
>Approx. 25000 to start but are going to need to handle 1,000,000+ shortly, and
>have an hour to do it. We are probably going to have several machines doing
>the work, but we want to know how many and how powerful.
Then go to my site: http://IMGate.MEIway.com and see how IMGate machines
off-load "SMTP client" processes (ie, the sending part of SMTP protocol)
from Imail. Also read my description of what it an SMTP client has to do
to deliver a msg to an SMTPD server over Internet.
And also study the www.lsoft.com site and the LSMTP product pages for the
sizes of machines and msg delivery rates they obtain. I bet postfix on
equivalent hardware would be nearly as fast as LSMTP but perfectly free.
And you could build as many cheap postfix machines as you need to increase
your delivery rate and provide outgoing gateway redundancy.
>Is that 5% the xeon is only using 5% because there is a bottleneck sending
>out the messages or
His big mutha Xeon box dumped all outgoing mail on the Sun box, totally
removing the "SMTP client" process burden from Imail. Imail was able to
dump the outgoing mail at probably near LAN "wire speed".
Also, he was not running IMAP or Web Msging, both heavy loads, but only
POP3 and SMTP.
>because Imail is sending out the messages faster than users are creating
>messages to be sent out?
yes, probably. If his users were delivering mail at "modem speeds" over
Internet (I doubt he had 250,000 users "in-house" on his LAN vbg), then
probably Imail had received, queued, unqueued, and delivered a user's mail
to the Sun box before the user had time to hang up his modem. Imail's SMTP
client is very, very good.
Len
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
