Are you using syslogd ?
RDA.-
-----Original Message-----
From: Flemming Funch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, May 10, 2000 5:28 AM
Subject: RE: QMail Performance Question & Miscellaneous Issues
>At 09:39 AM 5/9/2000, Matthew B. Henniges wrote:
>>On a dual celeron 466 with 512Mb ram. and 3 10k scsi drives (one for
>>/var/qmail/queue, one for /var/log, one for /usr/home)
>>concurrency remote at 500
>>concurrency local at 50
>>FreeBSD 3.4-S
>>localhost dnscache
>>
>>It will push 12 Million on a good day. (4% local delivery).
>>
>>This is qmail 1.03 + big-todo + big-concurrency + qmailqueue
>
>I'm green with envy. Now, I administer around 6 qmail servers. Typically a
>dual-600PIII with 1G of RAM, with /var on a 10K SCSI, and everything else
>on other disks. I also use qmail 1.03 + big-todo + big-concurrency. Remote
>concurrency set for 200. Queue set for a split of 293. Linux RH6.1 or 2.
>Outgoing mail is handled on different servers than the incoming. The
>machines are co-located on several different networks with plenty of
bandwidth.
>
>The machines are mostly sending out daily newsletters which are being fed
>in from another machine by smtp or qmtp (seems to make no difference in
>performance which I use), and I've experimented with various numbers of
>incoming smtp processes.
>
>If I'm sending more in more than a couple of smtp connections at the same
>time (e.g. 10 or 20), concurrent remote processes drop to a crawl of 2-10,
>the machine's load gets really high, 6-20, and the queue gets filled up
>quickly.
>
>If nothing is coming in, the remote processes usually are 20-80, and only
>on a very rare occasion would get close to my 200 concurrencyremote.
>
>So .. eh... would it likely be my disk I/O that slows it down (how do I
>test that?), or should I be switching to FreeBSD, or am I doing something
>stupid?
>
>What is localhost dnscache about? A local name server, to limit outgoing
>DNS lookups?
>
>- Flemming
>
>
>
