[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>"qmail is a secure, reliable, efficient, simple message transfer
>agent. It is meant as a replacement for the entire sendmail-binmail
>system on typical Internet-connected UNIX hosts", yeah,yeah....but in
>my feeling, it is not so fast at all.(I have use qmail for nearly 1
>year!)
>
>And following is the data of my test:
>
>[results deleted]
>
>All letters was sent to MTA by port 25,and to a local address.
Your test demonstrated that sendmail delivered a flood of messages to
a single local user faster than qmail. Big deal. Either MTA will
deliver messages to a user faster than they can read them, so who
cares? :-)
As Russ pointed out, sendmail might have been faster at this task, but
qmail was more reliable and secure. Reliability and security don't
come without cost. Did you verify that both MTA's actually delivered
all of the messages you sent?
Also, your test is highly dependent upon the local delivery mechanism,
and you gave no details about that whatsoever. Sendmail doesn't do
local delivery at all: it hands messages off to /bin/mail or procmail
or some other Message Delivery Agent (MDA). What did the sendmail in
your test use? qmail can do local delivery itself to either an mbox or
maildir mailbox, or it can use an external MDA like /bin/mail or
procmail. To be fair, your test should have used the same MDA sendmail
used. Did it?
Benchmarking is *very* hard to get right. I suggest you leave it to
experts until you know how to do it properly.
-Dave
