Hi,
I manage a qmail server which serves about 5000 pop users. We do it on a
PII, with about 16G of disk space. A PII, is plenty of machine, but
would have added more disk space if I had to do it over again. That
server does about 20,000 msgs per day, and load average rarely breaks 1.
I think Exchange is probably as fast as qmail (if you throw a few more
resources at it), but it needs constant attention. Qmail needs no
attention. That's the thing.
- Eric
Peter Green escribi�:
>
> On Tue, Nov 16, 1999 at 12:56:12PM +0100, Marthe Nes�en Gangfl�t wrote:
> > Hi people,
> >
> > I need benchmarks and such to show my employer that Linux can rock mail
> > better than NT Exchange (dohh). We use RedHat Linux and qmail for this,
> > because that's where we have knowledge. This is somehing we might sell to
> > customers of ours, and it's about 2000-5000 pop-users.. Can qmail manage
> > that much on ONE single server?
>
> I can't speak for Exchange; nor can I speak for pop-users specifically.
> However, I have no qualms about qmail scaling that high. On our network, we
> have two qmail machines: a main relay server and an ezmlm ml server. Neither
> machine delivers anything local, so all deliveries are "remote" (even if on
> the same network).
>
> Here is the output from `zcat qmail-19991115.gz|localtai|matchup|zoverall`:
>
> [ relay server ]
> Completed messages: 50939
> Recipients for completed messages: 191315
> Total delivery attempts for completed messages: 200494
> Average delivery attempts per completed message: 3.93596
> Bytes in completed messages: 339800621
> Bytes weighted by success: 917491749
> Average message qtime (s): 180.223
>
> Total delivery attempts: 224784
> success: 197167
> failure: 7485
> deferral: 20132
> Total ddelay (s): 17580934.661599
> Average ddelay per success (s): 89.167734
> Total xdelay (s): 1606541.947916
> Average xdelay per delivery attempt (s): 7.147048
> Time span (days): 0.993594
> Average concurrency: 18.7141
>
> [ ezmlm server ]
> Completed messages: 4786
> Recipients for completed messages: 5319
> Total delivery attempts for completed messages: 5415
> Average delivery attempts per completed message: 1.13142
> Bytes in completed messages: 26064596
> Bytes weighted by success: 27721323
> Average message qtime (s): 112.261
>
> Total delivery attempts: 74849
> success: 62120
> failure: 1960
> deferral: 10769
> Total ddelay (s): 19233264.798056
> Average ddelay per success (s): 309.614694
> Total xdelay (s): 661400.438022
> Average xdelay per delivery attempt (s): 8.836463
> Time span (days): 0.983027
> Average concurrency: 7.78727
>
> The hardware/software for each:
>
> [ relay ]
> AMD K6-2 333
> 384MB RAM
> UW SCSI disk on Buslogic controller
> True tulip 100bTX NIC on 3com 10/100 switch, full-dup
> RH6 w/ 2.2.13 kernel
> qmail-1.03 + jbuce.diff + newlines.patch
>
> [ ezmlm ]
> Dual P90 EISA
> 128MB RAM
> FW SCSI disk on Adaptec 2940
> 3com 3c509 10bT on 3com 10/100 switch
> RH6 w/ 2.2.10 SMP kernel
> qmail-1.03 + jbuce.diff + newlines.patch
> ezmlm+idx-0.322
>
> The relay machine is also our primary name server; the ezmlm machine (made
> entirely out of "junk" parts) also serves a little news with INN. I'd say a
> couple of thousand POP accounts are not totally unheard of... :)
>
> /pg
> --
> Peter Green
> Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
