Internal Usage articles getting visible in the SRM Console for END USERS

[babajan baig]

Hi Team,

We have an article for which Internal Usage is Set to YES, that article is
getting visible in SRM Entry console for END USERS/SRM USERS which is not
expected.

Kindly suggest how the issue can be fixed!

Regards,
-Babajan.

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: [EXTERNAL] OT: I lost my father last evening..

[Sanford, Claire]

Oh Dear!  I am so sorry for your loss.  Remember the good times and take time 
to enjoy the memories!


Claire

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 11:55 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: [EXTERNAL] OT: I lost my father last evening..

**
I have considered many of you as a part of my extended family and have got to 
know many of you over the years personally so felt the need to inform those 
that know me that I lost my father last evening. He passed away peacefully and 
will be missed by those that he left behind, my mom, my brother and me.. He was 
a big part of who I am and what I may have become and I could not have asked 
anything more from him than what he could have given me.. Some of my best years 
of my childhood and my young adult life were the years I spent with him before 
I left home for perusing my career with Remedy..

Please keep him in your prayers..

Joe
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: I lost my father last evening..

[Reiser, John J]

"won't you come on in?"
Beautiful song from a classic singer.

Thank you,
---
John J. Reiser
Building 760-J202
Remedy AR System Developer
Senior Software Development Analyst
Lockheed Martin - MST Moorestown Region
The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Pay close attention and be illuminated by its brilliance. - paraphrased by me

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 4:35 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: I lost my father last evening..

**
Stan, John, Michelle, Rohan, Vaibhav, Ramy, Jase, Brian, Danny, Rick, Terri, 
Timothy, Rob, Sandra, Pascale, Frederick and many others who have written to me 
offline - I hope I have not missed any of you.. Thank you all for your kind 
wishes and condolences..

I have tried to find peace with his passing by occasionally playing music he 
loved - his favorite artist was an old American country singer who has slowly 
been forgotten called Jim Reeves, I recall one of his favorite song was 
"Welcome To My World"..

Joe



From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Stan Feinstein
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 5:48 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: I lost my father last evening..

Hi Joe,

I'm sorry for your loss.  I hope that time will work its magic and the days get 
better for you and your family.  You probably know that no clichés help in this 
difficult time.  If you ever want to talk about it, please give me a call at 
310-230-1722.

Stan

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 9:55 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: OT: I lost my father last evening..

**
I have considered many of you as a part of my extended family and have got to 
know many of you over the years personally so felt the need to inform those 
that know me that I lost my father last evening. He passed away peacefully and 
will be missed by those that he left behind, my mom, my brother and me.. He was 
a big part of who I am and what I may have become and I could not have asked 
anything more from him than what he could have given me.. Some of my best years 
of my childhood and my young adult life were the years I spent with him before 
I left home for perusing my career with Remedy..

Please keep him in your prayers..

Joe
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ _ARSlist: "Where 
the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: I lost my father last evening..

[Joe D'Souza]

Stan, John, Michelle, Rohan, Vaibhav, Ramy, Jase, Brian, Danny, Rick, Terri,
Timothy, Rob, Sandra, Pascale, Frederick and many others who have written to
me offline – I hope I have not missed any of you.. Thank you all for your
kind wishes and condolences..

 

I have tried to find peace with his passing by occasionally playing music he
loved – his favorite artist was an old American country singer who has
slowly been forgotten called Jim Reeves, I recall one of his favorite song
was “Welcome To My World”..

 

Joe

 

 

  _  

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Stan Feinstein
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 5:48 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: I lost my father last evening..

 

Hi Joe,

 

I’m sorry for your loss.  I hope that time will work its magic and the days
get better for you and your family.  You probably know that no clichés help
in this difficult time.  If you ever want to talk about it, please give me a
call at 310-230-1722.

 

Stan

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 9:55 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: OT: I lost my father last evening..

 

** 

I have considered many of you as a part of my extended family and have got
to know many of you over the years personally so felt the need to inform
those that know me that I lost my father last evening. He passed away
peacefully and will be missed by those that he left behind, my mom, my
brother and me.. He was a big part of who I am and what I may have become
and I could not have asked anything more from him than what he could have
given me.. Some of my best years of my childhood and my young adult life
were the years I spent with him before I left home for perusing my career
with Remedy..

 

Please keep him in your prayers..

 

Joe

_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ 

_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

ITSM : Assignment Configuration

[Sweety]

Hi Experts,

I ran across a small doubt which you may find it stupid but I need a 
clarification on that. 

In Assignment Configuration form we have a field called Event which we use to 
define for which activity that assignment rule needs to be triggered. But will 
it also work if I select irrelevant checkbox under Available to module?

For example : I have selected an Event as "Incident Owner" and in the Available 
System modules I choose "Change management". Will this rule will work? If so 
then for which module will it work Incident or Change?

Thanks You.
Sweety

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Email performance/SMTP relays

[Jason Miller]

I also wonder if some timeout or number of message threshold is being hit
by the first mailbox and not leaving much processing room for the second
mailbox? By the time the first mailbox finishes sending there is little or
no threshold left for the second mailbox. If you know when a blast to
mailbox 2 is going to happen, as a simple test you could disable the first
mailbox (restart EE) and see if the blast in mailbox 2 processes quicker.

Jason

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 8:33 AM, LJ LongWing  wrote:

> **
> there are many settings you can set in the properties file to determine
> how many are sent per connection with the server, etcso, you may need
> to tweak some of those outgoing settings.
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Dave Barber 
> wrote:
>
>> **
>> I should have clarified - the discrepancy we're seeing is between the
>> create time and the time sent on the email messages form.  I have
>> monitoring in place that counts the number of unsent messages and sends me
>> an email (via the reliable gateway/mailbox) when there are more than a few
>> hundred unsent messages.
>>
>> Once they've been marked by the email messages form as "sent", they do
>> actually send fairly quick.  Possibly a problem at our end, but as we have
>> one mailbox that is sending without any performance problems, that is
>> making me think that the email engine itself is having no real problems.
>>
>> I cannot readily determine if the fault is somewhere on the network
>> between the AR Server and the gateway or the SMTP gateway itself.
>>
>> On 26 April 2016 at 13:31, Shellman, David  wrote:
>>
>>> **
>>>
>>> LJ,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree.  Looking at the email headers will show where the delays
>>> occur.  Over the years I have seen delays within the email system.  I have
>>> also observed where the delay is handing off to the email server.  Reading
>>> the email heads was helpful in figuring it out.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I also build a small two form system for monitoring email delays.  The
>>> first form was used to send an email that contained a GUID to our various
>>> outbound email addresses.  The email created record in the second form.
>>> Workflow on the second form used the GUID to update the Status of the
>>> record on the first form.  There were escalation notifications on the first
>>> form that would send us an SMS if the record in the first form was not
>>> updated in 20 minutes.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
>>> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *LJ LongWing
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 26, 2016 8:22 AM
>>> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>>> *Subject:* Re: Email performance/SMTP relays
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> **
>>>
>>> Dave,
>>>
>>> The most important thing to figure out is where the delay isdo the
>>> emails sit in your 'outbox' for up to 12 hours, or do they leave your mail
>>> form in the normal timelines, and then simply take up to 12 hours to be
>>> delivered?  I have found in this type of situation that the delay is
>>> typically on the other end, not within Remedy.  Check that and if you find
>>> that it reaches your smtp server in 'normal' time, then takes up to 12
>>> hours to be delivered...then the admins of that smtp server need to
>>> investigate where the delay is.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Dave Barber 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> **
>>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> Experiencing performance problems on mail sending; some background ...
>>>
>>> Server is running ITSM 7.6 Change management on a 7.5 Solaris server,
>>> Oracle at the back end.  General application performance is fine.
>>>
>>> The server is making use of 2 outgoing mailboxes.
>>>
>>> Mailbox 1 - used for system notifications, such as "This change requires
>>> your approval", etc.  connects to a "legacy" SMTP relay, up to a few
>>> thousand emails sent each day, runs fine.  Emails are picked up/sent within
>>> a minute or two.
>>>
>>> Mailbox 2 - used for a custom notifications system (to notify customers
>>> of outages), similarly sends a couple of thousand emails per day.  Has been
>>> in active use since February this year.  As it is external emails it is
>>> using a "mass mail" SMTP relay designated for this purpose.
>>>
>>> It is this second one that is having problems - emails take anything
>>> from 3 minutes to 12 (!!) hours to be sent.
>>>
>>> As far as I can see the basic configuration/polling is setup the same on
>>> both (2 minutes).
>>>
>>> Any suggestions?  Would reducing the polling interval have a positive
>>> change?  Or are there further configuration changes on the email engine
>>> itself that could improve performance?  Or am I just at the mercy of a
>>> sluggish SMTP relay?
>>>
>>> (I've never had to investigate email performance problems!)
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _ARSlist: 

Re: Email performance/SMTP relays

[LJ LongWing]

there are many settings you can set in the properties file to determine how
many are sent per connection with the server, etcso, you may need to
tweak some of those outgoing settings.

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Dave Barber  wrote:

> **
> I should have clarified - the discrepancy we're seeing is between the
> create time and the time sent on the email messages form.  I have
> monitoring in place that counts the number of unsent messages and sends me
> an email (via the reliable gateway/mailbox) when there are more than a few
> hundred unsent messages.
>
> Once they've been marked by the email messages form as "sent", they do
> actually send fairly quick.  Possibly a problem at our end, but as we have
> one mailbox that is sending without any performance problems, that is
> making me think that the email engine itself is having no real problems.
>
> I cannot readily determine if the fault is somewhere on the network
> between the AR Server and the gateway or the SMTP gateway itself.
>
> On 26 April 2016 at 13:31, Shellman, David  wrote:
>
>> **
>>
>> LJ,
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree.  Looking at the email headers will show where the delays occur.
>> Over the years I have seen delays within the email system.  I have also
>> observed where the delay is handing off to the email server.  Reading the
>> email heads was helpful in figuring it out.
>>
>>
>>
>> I also build a small two form system for monitoring email delays.  The
>> first form was used to send an email that contained a GUID to our various
>> outbound email addresses.  The email created record in the second form.
>> Workflow on the second form used the GUID to update the Status of the
>> record on the first form.  There were escalation notifications on the first
>> form that would send us an SMS if the record in the first form was not
>> updated in 20 minutes.
>>
>>
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
>> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *LJ LongWing
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 26, 2016 8:22 AM
>> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
>> *Subject:* Re: Email performance/SMTP relays
>>
>>
>>
>> **
>>
>> Dave,
>>
>> The most important thing to figure out is where the delay isdo the
>> emails sit in your 'outbox' for up to 12 hours, or do they leave your mail
>> form in the normal timelines, and then simply take up to 12 hours to be
>> delivered?  I have found in this type of situation that the delay is
>> typically on the other end, not within Remedy.  Check that and if you find
>> that it reaches your smtp server in 'normal' time, then takes up to 12
>> hours to be delivered...then the admins of that smtp server need to
>> investigate where the delay is.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Dave Barber 
>> wrote:
>>
>> **
>>
>> All,
>>
>> Experiencing performance problems on mail sending; some background ...
>>
>> Server is running ITSM 7.6 Change management on a 7.5 Solaris server,
>> Oracle at the back end.  General application performance is fine.
>>
>> The server is making use of 2 outgoing mailboxes.
>>
>> Mailbox 1 - used for system notifications, such as "This change requires
>> your approval", etc.  connects to a "legacy" SMTP relay, up to a few
>> thousand emails sent each day, runs fine.  Emails are picked up/sent within
>> a minute or two.
>>
>> Mailbox 2 - used for a custom notifications system (to notify customers
>> of outages), similarly sends a couple of thousand emails per day.  Has been
>> in active use since February this year.  As it is external emails it is
>> using a "mass mail" SMTP relay designated for this purpose.
>>
>> It is this second one that is having problems - emails take anything from
>> 3 minutes to 12 (!!) hours to be sent.
>>
>> As far as I can see the basic configuration/polling is setup the same on
>> both (2 minutes).
>>
>> Any suggestions?  Would reducing the polling interval have a positive
>> change?  Or are there further configuration changes on the email engine
>> itself that could improve performance?  Or am I just at the mercy of a
>> sluggish SMTP relay?
>>
>> (I've never had to investigate email performance problems!)
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
>>
>>
>>
>> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
>> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
>>
>
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Remedy SSO

[Smerz, Christian]

How many of you have successfully configured Remedy SSO.  We're struggling to 
get this working against LDAP.

We keep seeing the following message while logging in "Forbidden request! Goto 
url is wrong".  Any ideas on what we might be missing?

ARS/ITSM 9.1 Windows

Christian Smerz | Web and Tech Systems | Enterprise Products
Office: 713.381.6785 | Mobile: 832.726.9167 | Email: 
cesm...@eprod.com




This message (including any attachments) is confidential and intended for a 
specific individual and purpose. If you are not the intended recipient, please 
notify the sender immediately and delete this message.

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Email performance/SMTP relays

[Dave Barber]

I should have clarified - the discrepancy we're seeing is between the
create time and the time sent on the email messages form.  I have
monitoring in place that counts the number of unsent messages and sends me
an email (via the reliable gateway/mailbox) when there are more than a few
hundred unsent messages.

Once they've been marked by the email messages form as "sent", they do
actually send fairly quick.  Possibly a problem at our end, but as we have
one mailbox that is sending without any performance problems, that is
making me think that the email engine itself is having no real problems.

I cannot readily determine if the fault is somewhere on the network between
the AR Server and the gateway or the SMTP gateway itself.

On 26 April 2016 at 13:31, Shellman, David  wrote:

> **
>
> LJ,
>
>
>
> I agree.  Looking at the email headers will show where the delays occur.
> Over the years I have seen delays within the email system.  I have also
> observed where the delay is handing off to the email server.  Reading the
> email heads was helpful in figuring it out.
>
>
>
> I also build a small two form system for monitoring email delays.  The
> first form was used to send an email that contained a GUID to our various
> outbound email addresses.  The email created record in the second form.
> Workflow on the second form used the GUID to update the Status of the
> record on the first form.  There were escalation notifications on the first
> form that would send us an SMS if the record in the first form was not
> updated in 20 minutes.
>
>
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:
> arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] *On Behalf Of *LJ LongWing
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 26, 2016 8:22 AM
> *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
> *Subject:* Re: Email performance/SMTP relays
>
>
>
> **
>
> Dave,
>
> The most important thing to figure out is where the delay isdo the
> emails sit in your 'outbox' for up to 12 hours, or do they leave your mail
> form in the normal timelines, and then simply take up to 12 hours to be
> delivered?  I have found in this type of situation that the delay is
> typically on the other end, not within Remedy.  Check that and if you find
> that it reaches your smtp server in 'normal' time, then takes up to 12
> hours to be delivered...then the admins of that smtp server need to
> investigate where the delay is.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Dave Barber 
> wrote:
>
> **
>
> All,
>
> Experiencing performance problems on mail sending; some background ...
>
> Server is running ITSM 7.6 Change management on a 7.5 Solaris server,
> Oracle at the back end.  General application performance is fine.
>
> The server is making use of 2 outgoing mailboxes.
>
> Mailbox 1 - used for system notifications, such as "This change requires
> your approval", etc.  connects to a "legacy" SMTP relay, up to a few
> thousand emails sent each day, runs fine.  Emails are picked up/sent within
> a minute or two.
>
> Mailbox 2 - used for a custom notifications system (to notify customers of
> outages), similarly sends a couple of thousand emails per day.  Has been in
> active use since February this year.  As it is external emails it is using
> a "mass mail" SMTP relay designated for this purpose.
>
> It is this second one that is having problems - emails take anything from
> 3 minutes to 12 (!!) hours to be sent.
>
> As far as I can see the basic configuration/polling is setup the same on
> both (2 minutes).
>
> Any suggestions?  Would reducing the polling interval have a positive
> change?  Or are there further configuration changes on the email engine
> itself that could improve performance?  Or am I just at the mercy of a
> sluggish SMTP relay?
>
> (I've never had to investigate email performance problems!)
>
> Regards
>
> Dave
>
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
>
>
>
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
>

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Email performance/SMTP relays

[Shellman, David]

LJ,

I agree.  Looking at the email headers will show where the delays occur.  Over 
the years I have seen delays within the email system.  I have also observed 
where the delay is handing off to the email server.  Reading the email heads 
was helpful in figuring it out.

I also build a small two form system for monitoring email delays.  The first 
form was used to send an email that contained a GUID to our various outbound 
email addresses.  The email created record in the second form.  Workflow on the 
second form used the GUID to update the Status of the record on the first form. 
 There were escalation notifications on the first form that would send us an 
SMS if the record in the first form was not updated in 20 minutes.

Dave

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 8:22 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Email performance/SMTP relays

**
Dave,
The most important thing to figure out is where the delay isdo the emails 
sit in your 'outbox' for up to 12 hours, or do they leave your mail form in the 
normal timelines, and then simply take up to 12 hours to be delivered?  I have 
found in this type of situation that the delay is typically on the other end, 
not within Remedy.  Check that and if you find that it reaches your smtp server 
in 'normal' time, then takes up to 12 hours to be delivered...then the admins 
of that smtp server need to investigate where the delay is.

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Dave Barber 
> wrote:
**
All,
Experiencing performance problems on mail sending; some background ...
Server is running ITSM 7.6 Change management on a 7.5 Solaris server, Oracle at 
the back end.  General application performance is fine.
The server is making use of 2 outgoing mailboxes.
Mailbox 1 - used for system notifications, such as "This change requires your 
approval", etc.  connects to a "legacy" SMTP relay, up to a few thousand emails 
sent each day, runs fine.  Emails are picked up/sent within a minute or two.
Mailbox 2 - used for a custom notifications system (to notify customers of 
outages), similarly sends a couple of thousand emails per day.  Has been in 
active use since February this year.  As it is external emails it is using a 
"mass mail" SMTP relay designated for this purpose.
It is this second one that is having problems - emails take anything from 3 
minutes to 12 (!!) hours to be sent.
As far as I can see the basic configuration/polling is setup the same on both 
(2 minutes).
Any suggestions?  Would reducing the polling interval have a positive change?  
Or are there further configuration changes on the email engine itself that 
could improve performance?  Or am I just at the mercy of a sluggish SMTP relay?
(I've never had to investigate email performance problems!)
Regards
Dave
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Re: Email performance/SMTP relays

[LJ LongWing]

Dave,
The most important thing to figure out is where the delay isdo the
emails sit in your 'outbox' for up to 12 hours, or do they leave your mail
form in the normal timelines, and then simply take up to 12 hours to be
delivered?  I have found in this type of situation that the delay is
typically on the other end, not within Remedy.  Check that and if you find
that it reaches your smtp server in 'normal' time, then takes up to 12
hours to be delivered...then the admins of that smtp server need to
investigate where the delay is.

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Dave Barber  wrote:

> **
> All,
>
> Experiencing performance problems on mail sending; some background ...
>
> Server is running ITSM 7.6 Change management on a 7.5 Solaris server,
> Oracle at the back end.  General application performance is fine.
>
> The server is making use of 2 outgoing mailboxes.
>
> Mailbox 1 - used for system notifications, such as "This change requires
> your approval", etc.  connects to a "legacy" SMTP relay, up to a few
> thousand emails sent each day, runs fine.  Emails are picked up/sent within
> a minute or two.
>
> Mailbox 2 - used for a custom notifications system (to notify customers of
> outages), similarly sends a couple of thousand emails per day.  Has been in
> active use since February this year.  As it is external emails it is using
> a "mass mail" SMTP relay designated for this purpose.
>
> It is this second one that is having problems - emails take anything from
> 3 minutes to 12 (!!) hours to be sent.
>
> As far as I can see the basic configuration/polling is setup the same on
> both (2 minutes).
>
> Any suggestions?  Would reducing the polling interval have a positive
> change?  Or are there further configuration changes on the email engine
> itself that could improve performance?  Or am I just at the mercy of a
> sluggish SMTP relay?
>
> (I've never had to investigate email performance problems!)
>
> Regards
>
> Dave
> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Email performance/SMTP relays

[Dave Barber]

All,

Experiencing performance problems on mail sending; some background ...

Server is running ITSM 7.6 Change management on a 7.5 Solaris server,
Oracle at the back end.  General application performance is fine.

The server is making use of 2 outgoing mailboxes.

Mailbox 1 - used for system notifications, such as "This change requires
your approval", etc.  connects to a "legacy" SMTP relay, up to a few
thousand emails sent each day, runs fine.  Emails are picked up/sent within
a minute or two.

Mailbox 2 - used for a custom notifications system (to notify customers of
outages), similarly sends a couple of thousand emails per day.  Has been in
active use since February this year.  As it is external emails it is using
a "mass mail" SMTP relay designated for this purpose.

It is this second one that is having problems - emails take anything from 3
minutes to 12 (!!) hours to be sent.

As far as I can see the basic configuration/polling is setup the same on
both (2 minutes).

Any suggestions?  Would reducing the polling interval have a positive
change?  Or are there further configuration changes on the email engine
itself that could improve performance?  Or am I just at the mercy of a
sluggish SMTP relay?

(I've never had to investigate email performance problems!)

Regards

Dave

___
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"