On Fri, Apr 09, 1999 at 08:44:06AM -0400, Dave Sill wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 08, 1999 at 03:59:18PM -0400, Dave Sill wrote:
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> >Current speed is 20,000-40,000/hour on a PPRO200/PII350
> >>
> >> Which is it? PPRO200 or PII350?
> >
> >20K/hour for PPRO200
> >40K/hour for PII350
>
> Well, you can get 60k/hour using both. Frankly, these look like pretty
> good numbers to me.
I need to find a way of doing >100K/hour. Ideally with one machine. I
vaguely seems to recall that the author of qmail was claiming something
like 100K/hour performance?
> >> How's your qmail configured? What does qmail-showctl say?
> >
> >concurrencyremote: Remote concurrency is 255.
>
> When you're sending messages, how many qmail-remotes are running?
About 90-130. 255 if I stop delivery for a little while and then restart
it. To me that means that the machine can send faster then I can get the
messages into the queue.
> >> What kind of connectivity do you have?
> >
> >That particular box is connected to a 100Mbit network (located at Exodus)
>
> Is that 100Mb local or Internet?
100Mbit Internet.
> >> Multiple servers? RAM disk? qmail 2.0?
> >
> >/tmp is on a RAM disk
>
> I was thinking in terms of putting the queue on a Quantum Solid State
> Disk (http://www.quantum.com/products/ssd/).
>
> >Is qmail 2.0 out?
>
> No, but it promises dramtically improved queue performance.
Do we have an ETA?
Dirk
> -Dave
