Keith Burdis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 13 April 1999 at 21:39:09 +0000
> What I had in mind was that with sendmail you can do:
>
> HELO
> MAIL FROM
> RCPT TO: <address-1>
> RCPT TO: <address-2>
> ....
> RCPT TO: <address-n>
> DATA
> ...
>
> whereas with qmail, since it doesn't do multiple rcpts, you'd have to do:
>
> for i = 1 to n
> HELO
> MAIL FROM
> RCPT TO: <address-i>
> DATA
> ...
> QUIT
>
> Remember that we're talking about sending one message to a large number of
> addresses on the same remote host. In general qmail is faster, but I think in
> this case any MTA that does multiple rcpt to's will be quicker.
Yes, it does seem logical that the sendmail approach would be faster.
Have you experimented with this situation in the real world? People
who have report that in fact the qmail way is faster.
Performance analysis is important, but that analysis must not stop
with examining the algorithms; it must be carried out into the field,
to see what *really* happens in the real world. While there are cases
where qmail loses on delivery speed, they're far rarer than an
armchair analysis might suggest.
Or, to put it differently, in performance analysis, what "seems right"
is not always what *is* right.
--
David Dyer-Bennet [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.ddb.com/~ddb (photos, sf) Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon
http://ouroboros.demesne.com/ The Ouroboros Bookworms
Join the 20th century before it's too late!
