Mike Flynn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Q01. Is it true that I can get an enormous increase in the number
> of messages I could mail per hour using qmail?
Possibly. If your current set-up is limited by your hardware (disk
I/O) or network bandwidth, you could see anything from modest
improvement to significant degradation. If you have ample bandwidth,
sufficient CPU, and good disk I/O, you should see a good
improvement. I don't know about "enormous" improvement, though. The
best way to achieve huge improvements is to carefully analyze your
work flow and adjust your processes and the underlying system
(hardware, network, OS, MTA, DNS, etc) for maximum performance.
We don't know nearly enough about your environment to tell whether
qmail would be a good fit for you. If I were you, I'd hire a competent
consultant to evaluate your needs and make a recommendation.
>Q02. Is qmail free? (I will be using it in a "commercial" product).
Yes.
>Q03. Does my environment sound like a "simple" use of qmail or
> is there hidden aspects I'm not aware of?
Your environment is simple in the sense that chess is a simple
game. An out-of-the-box qmail will do what you need, but achieving the
best performance from it (or any other MTA) is not trivial.
>Q04. Can I keep the portion of the product that processes returned mail
> the same (i.e. using sendmail) and still use qmail to do the
>mailing?
That depends upon how that code works. It'll probably require minor
tweaking to work with qmail's bounce message format, but since since
that format was designed to be easy-to-parse, this is a simple job.
However, you would be foolish not to consider taking advantage of
qmail's VERP's to automate bounce handling.
-Dave
