Follow up statistics.
1125 users emailed
concurrency remote set to 500
Date qmail-remotes Processes
12:00am 500 558
12:02am 478 500
12:03 167 182
12:04 35 102
12:05 10 68
12:06 10 68
12:07 9 67
12:08 9 67
The last 9 qmail-remotes hung around for another 5 minutes or so.
This equals about 281 messages delivered per minute.
Or 16,875 per hour
or 405,000 per day
The mailing list contains a large percentage of international addresses.
We are located in chicago and have fairly good connectivity to the US.
Cheers
Ken Jones
inter7
Ken Jones wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> Just thought I'd let you all know. This mailing list has moved to a
> new machine. It was time for an upgrade. Here are the stats on the
> machine we are using.
>
> Pentium III copermine 700Mhz 100Mhz Front Side Bus
> 256Mbytes Ram
> adaptec SCSI controller on mother board
> 2 18G scsi2 LVD aka SCSI160 drives
> 10/100 Intel PCI EtherExpress Pro100 (10Mbit ethernet hub)
> qmail-1.03 with large concurrency patch
> big todo patch
> vpopmail 4.9.8-1
> qmailadmin-0.42
> sqwebmail-1.2.5
> daemontools
> ucspi-tcp
> djbdns-1.05
> qmailmrtg
>
> We moved the email setup from the old machine to the new machine.
> Then switched IP's to the new machine and turned off the old.
>
> The longest part, timewise, was moving the old email directories
> to the new machine. First I tar'd gziped them, then ftp'd them
> over. untared and fixed ownership. tweaked some other things.
>
> One thing I found handy was a shell command to remove old emails
>
> find /home/vpopmail/domains -ctime +30 -name "*.vast.inter7.com*" -exec
> rm -rf \{\} \;
>
> This removed all email's people had which were last used 30 days ago.
> haha.
> prune out that old email. Just modify the +30 to what you are
> comfortable with.
> the "vast.inter7.com" string should be the string that the emails
> contain.
> Which, if you have your hostname and dns setup correctly, should be your
> hostname.
>
> We also switched to djbdns.
> I think this is a big plus. On the old machine we upgraded the bind
> recently.
> Because of the recent security hole. So I took this opertunity to switch
> over.
> I'm glad I did. It runs faster and we don't have to worry about
> security.
> DJB has damn solid code.
>
> Bind 9 was big and slow. Even the code base on djbdns is orders of
> magnitude
> smaller. make takes no time. with bind it is much longer.
>
> I thought about sending out a message earlier. This email is an
> additional
> test to see our throughput. I'm looking at tuneing maximum concurrency.
> I'm going to try 500 max remote concurrency with this email.
>
> cheers
> Ken Jones
> inter7
>
> PS: I'm working on an htpasswd protected djbdns web admin program using
> our new vqregister html template code that [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote.
> Anyone interested in some hobby coding, please email me directly.
