On Sun, Jul 23, 2000 at 08:14:57AM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > This results is indicative at best - here are some caveats:
> >
> > o DNS overhead is not counted
>
> In his measurements that indicated that qmail used less bandwidth in
> real-life situations than sendmail, Dan counted the DNS traffic due to
> sendmail. You'd have to.
Of course. All I want this script to do is give people a hint as to
whether they're wasting their time worrying about it or not.
If the hint says "don't even bother thinking about it", good. If it says
"hey man you *may* be able to save a lot of bandwidth" good. At least
it's a starting point to work from.
Since many claim (myself included) that most people will end up in the
don't even bother thinking about it" camp, the caveats are intended
to make the hint conservative so that no one can accuse it of favouring
qmail. In other words, this script is doing everything it can to trend
the numbers against qmail - I don't think that's going to significantly
change the outcome that most people get.
Regards.
