Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
The squid developers recommend aufs: http://www.squid-cache.org/mail-archive/squid-users/200709/0150.html Most people seem to regard it as stable. at most 1 hour before crash on my system with 300 users served, many version tested, none worked. possibly it doesn't under linux or under light load. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 17:15:58 +0200 (CEST) Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I'm not sure that diskd is still preferred for FreeBSD. > > > i don't know what is preferred. i know what works. > > only ufs and diskd is reliable, The squid developers recommend aufs: http://www.squid-cache.org/mail-archive/squid-users/200709/0150.html Most people seem to regard it as stable. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
I'm not sure that diskd is still preferred for FreeBSD. The three cache types: ufs,aufs and diskd are all the same on disk. diskd is ufs with extra processes to handle disk access, aufs uses threads instead. i don't know what is preferred. i know what works. only ufs and diskd is reliable, ufs is single threaded and blocking, diskd=one process for each spool dedicated just for disk I/O ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 08:26:16 -0700 "Kurt Buff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > However, I'll look up the diskd docs for > squid, and see what that's all about. I'm not sure that diskd is still preferred for FreeBSD. The three cache types: ufs,aufs and diskd are all the same on disk. diskd is ufs with extra processes to handle disk access, aufs uses threads instead. The reason for using diskd was that earlier versions FreeBSD had poor threading support, but good shared memory support. From what I've read on the squid mailing list, aufs with libthr is being recommended these days. libthr is the default on FreeBSD 7, you need a libmap.conf entry on FreeBSD 6. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
it's strange at least you haven't it already for a long time. no matter you use squid or not. it takes 5 minutes to set up, and saves a bit of bandwidth and a lot of time on resolving hostnames I just looked at my configuration - looks like I had it going at one point, but disabled it, and I can't remember why. This may be the issue. only extra delays for DNS query and little more bandwidth used. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Steve >> >> It's been suggested off-list that I put up a caching DNS server. I'm >> in the process of doing that. Initial page load delay, however, is a >> new phenomenon, cropping up after our move from the T1 to the DS3, so >> I was putting it down to increased use of cache - I'm certainly >> willing to be schooled on that, though. We'll see what happens with a >> caching DNS server. > > it's strange at least you haven't it already for a long time. no matter you > use squid or not. it takes 5 minutes to set up, and saves a bit of bandwidth > and a lot of time on resolving hostnames I just looked at my configuration - looks like I had it going at one point, but disabled it, and I can't remember why. This may be the issue. Kurt ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
Steve It's been suggested off-list that I put up a caching DNS server. I'm in the process of doing that. Initial page load delay, however, is a new phenomenon, cropping up after our move from the T1 to the DS3, so I was putting it down to increased use of cache - I'm certainly willing to be schooled on that, though. We'll see what happens with a caching DNS server. it's strange at least you haven't it already for a long time. no matter you use squid or not. it takes 5 minutes to set up, and saves a bit of bandwidth and a lot of time on resolving hostnames ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
As a benchmark, there are about 230 people in my site who will be it's strange. my squid supports 300 users, with just 3 partitions on 3 drives (and other part of drives used for other things). and it EASILY do this. To further extend the question - what about things like mounting the RAID0 noatime, or other speed-enhancing settings? I've been reading noatime and soft dependencies. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
I'm hoping that 137gb striped across two RAID0 volumes should be sufficient space for our needs, and also hoping that it will be faster than individual drives. there is NO point to assume it will be faster than sum of speed of each drive, with program that already have logic to spread load across drives. squid do have ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 10:13 AM, Steve Bertrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Matthew Seaman wrote: > >>> should we use 7 or think about going with 6.3? >>> >> >> I'd go with 7.x every time. It wipes the floor with 6.3 performance-wise >> and it is just as stable and bug-free as you'ld expect from FreeBSD. >> You've >> seen it works for you: there's no conceivable reason to downgrade. > > I agree with Matthew here. > > We have a few production 7 boxes now, some being re-deployed completely from > 4.x, and a couple that have come from 6.x. > > Although I don't have any documentation to show a performance increase, it > certainly hasn't gotten worse. (I went to 7 for testing for particular > reasons very early on). > > Any issues I've run into with 7 are just as prevalent in 6, so my vote would > be to follow the 7 train. (Note: the only issues that I have *personally* > run into so far are related to the 're' driver, which is out of context > here). > > IMHO, more eyes are on the 7 track, so if you have the choice to build a new > box, why 'downgrade' right off the bat (its not my intention to knock 6.x > BTW)? Eventually you will be forced to jump a major revision which in some > cases given user applications can be a bit of a headache. > > Stick with what is here and now, and leave 6.x as your upgrade path for your > current 6.x boxen until you can get those boxes upgraded too. > > BTW, to the OP I would suspect that your initial delay that causes the > 'Internet to be slow' is related to DNS somehow. Hit a webserver by its IP > and see if the problem goes away. > > Steve It's been suggested off-list that I put up a caching DNS server. I'm in the process of doing that. Initial page load delay, however, is a new phenomenon, cropping up after our move from the T1 to the DS3, so I was putting it down to increased use of cache - I'm certainly willing to be schooled on that, though. We'll see what happens with a caching DNS server. Thanks, Kurt ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
Matthew Seaman wrote: should we use 7 or think about going with 6.3? I'd go with 7.x every time. It wipes the floor with 6.3 performance-wise and it is just as stable and bug-free as you'ld expect from FreeBSD. You've seen it works for you: there's no conceivable reason to downgrade. I agree with Matthew here. We have a few production 7 boxes now, some being re-deployed completely from 4.x, and a couple that have come from 6.x. Although I don't have any documentation to show a performance increase, it certainly hasn't gotten worse. (I went to 7 for testing for particular reasons very early on). Any issues I've run into with 7 are just as prevalent in 6, so my vote would be to follow the 7 train. (Note: the only issues that I have *personally* run into so far are related to the 're' driver, which is out of context here). IMHO, more eyes are on the 7 track, so if you have the choice to build a new box, why 'downgrade' right off the bat (its not my intention to knock 6.x BTW)? Eventually you will be forced to jump a major revision which in some cases given user applications can be a bit of a headache. Stick with what is here and now, and leave 6.x as your upgrade path for your current 6.x boxen until you can get those boxes upgraded too. BTW, to the OP I would suspect that your initial delay that causes the 'Internet to be slow' is related to DNS somehow. Hit a webserver by its IP and see if the problem goes away. Steve ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Kurt Buff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All, > > I've got a Compaq ML570 with 2gb RAM, dual PIII Xeon 700s and 5x10k > RPM drives in it attached to a Compaq 5300 RAID card that I'm going to > be using as a squid box. > > I've configured two drives as RAID 1 with the third as a hot spare, > and two drives as RAID0 - I intend to put the squid cache on the > latter, and have mounted it as /squid. > > I'm running 7STABLE from a couple of days ago. > > What might I do to achieve better/best performance? I'm replacing a > less capable whitebox. One of the big issues I've had has manifested > itself recently - we've moved from a T1 to a DS3, and while overall > throughput has increased dramatically, people are now complaining that > "the Internet is slow", which I've found is all down to initial page > load. I'm pursuing optimizing squid elsewhere, and want to focus on > getting this box as fast as I reasonably can before sticking squid on > it. I've got more RAM to put into it - I'd be stealing from another > machine that's little used, but I should be able to get it to 4gb RAM. > > As a benchmark, there are about 230 people in my site who will be > using this box for their proxy, and their usage is all over the map - > worse, I haven't been given the time to put any analysis tools into > play to figure out the load on the old box, as we're in the middle of > a number of other projects of equal or higher priority. > > Kurt To further extend the question - what about things like mounting the RAID0 noatime, or other speed-enhancing settings? I've been reading and googleing, trying to figure out how to mount it at boot, and I'm finding it a bit confusing. Kurt ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> be using as a squid box. >> >> I've configured two drives as RAID 1 with the third as a hot spare, >> and two drives as RAID0 - I intend to put the squid cache on the >> latter, and have mounted it as /squid. > > it would be better to turn off RAID at all and use all five disks as fine > squid partitions. > > use diskd "driver" in squid. > > add any used IDE drive for system. > > should go fine on it. squid is fast, if configured right. I'm hoping that 137gb striped across two RAID0 volumes should be sufficient space for our needs, and also hoping that it will be faster than individual drives. However, I'll look up the diskd docs for squid, and see what that's all about. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Fwd: Configuring an older server for speed...
Sorry. This should also have been sent to the list. -- Forwarded message -- From: Kurt Buff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 8:22 AM Subject: Re: Configuring an older server for speed... To: Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 4:51 AM, Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > what is DS3? how fast it is. > > it sounds somehow like "E3" which is 34Mbit/s > > i have 4 4Mbit/s DSL's in one place - total 16Mbit/s, and have no dedicated > hard drives for it, but 3 partitions on 3 SATA hard drives. > > it EASILY works taking few% CPU (at most) on core 2 duo and at most 30% of > each drive. > > it could easily make E3 on even 2 dedicated 10K RPM drives, not mentioning > five. Nominally, a DS3 is 45mbits/sec - we have a soft cap at 5mbits/sec, but I've seen lots of bursting to between 10 and 20 so far. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
less capable whitebox. One of the big issues I've had has manifested itself recently - we've moved from a T1 to a DS3, and while overall throughput has increased dramatically, people are now complaining that "the Internet is slow", which I've found is all down to initial page load. I'm pursuing optimizing squid elsewhere, and want to focus on getting this box as fast as I reasonably can before sticking squid on it. I've got more RAM to put into it - I'd be stealing from another machine that's little used, but I should be able to get it to 4gb RAM. you need only as much ram as to make squid database fit. roughly 7-8MB/GB storage, with 5 18GB disks it's <1GB, still less if you allow big files to be cached ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: Configuring an older server for speed...
Ryan Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't see the need. And I couldn't get 7 to install on my > brand new machine. Once I got the 6.3 amd64 build it went in > without an issue. Just because you could not install 7.0 does not mean 7.0 is flawed. > I don't see the reason to run the latest and greatest for a > file/web server. Desktops are one thing, but you can get more > out of your CPU and RAM with less clutter out of the box. You make the false assumption that latest and greatest somehow implies clutter. You needn't install what you do not use. This is true for 7.0 as much as it was for 6.3 and prior releases. I am not questioning your preference for 6.3, but please do not discourage others from upgrading based on an idiosyncratic problem you had with the 7.0 installation. -- Sahil Tandon NOTICE: If received in error, please destroy and notify sender. Sender does not intend to waive confidentiality or privilege. Use of this email is prohibited when received in error. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
be using as a squid box. I've configured two drives as RAID 1 with the third as a hot spare, and two drives as RAID0 - I intend to put the squid cache on the latter, and have mounted it as /squid. it would be better to turn off RAID at all and use all five disks as fine squid partitions. use diskd "driver" in squid. add any used IDE drive for system. should go fine on it. squid is fast, if configured right. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
prad wrote: On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 23:17:05 -0400 David Gurvich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Many of these features have undiscovered bugs that you might prefer not discovering on your own server. oh oh. but what if we are just running a plain webserver (mainly static html) and email. we are sticking to ufs of course. it is an older machine - dual 1.3G with 2G ram and a raid card. we've run 7 since the beginning of june on 2 desktops (700Hz with 192M and 128M ram) doing the above serving without any problems and are just about to set up this server to replace the other 2. should we use 7 or think about going with 6.3? I'd go with 7.x every time. It wipes the floor with 6.3 performance-wise and it is just as stable and bug-free as you'ld expect from FreeBSD. You've seen it works for you: there's no conceivable reason to downgrade. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
Sahil Tandon wrote: Ryan Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Kurt Buff wrote: [...] I would recommend fBSD 6.3 instead of 7. You don't need it, unless you have a documented reason it has to be 7.0 Please qualify that recommendation; as it stands, it is pure FUD. I don't see the need. And I couldn't get 7 to install on my brand new machine. Once I got the 6.3 amd64 build it went in without an issue. I don't see the reason to run the latest and greatest for a file/web server. Desktops are one thing, but you can get more out of your CPU and RAM with less clutter out of the box. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
Ryan Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kurt Buff wrote: [...] > I would recommend fBSD 6.3 instead of 7. You don't need it, unless you have > a documented reason it has to be 7.0 Please qualify that recommendation; as it stands, it is pure FUD. -- Sahil Tandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 6:39 PM, Ryan Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kurt Buff wrote: >> >> All, >> >> I've got a Compaq ML570 with 2gb RAM, dual PIII Xeon 700s and 5x10k >> RPM drives in it attached to a Compaq 5300 RAID card that I'm going to >> be using as a squid box. >> >> I've configured two drives as RAID 1 with the third as a hot spare, >> and two drives as RAID0 - I intend to put the squid cache on the >> latter, and have mounted it as /squid. >> >> I'm running 7STABLE from a couple of days ago. >> >> What might I do to achieve better/best performance? I'm replacing a >> less capable whitebox. One of the big issues I've had has manifested >> itself recently - we've moved from a T1 to a DS3, and while overall >> throughput has increased dramatically, people are now complaining that >> "the Internet is slow", which I've found is all down to initial page >> load. I'm pursuing optimizing squid elsewhere, and want to focus on >> getting this box as fast as I reasonably can before sticking squid on >> it. I've got more RAM to put into it - I'd be stealing from another >> machine that's little used, but I should be able to get it to 4gb RAM. >> >> As a benchmark, there are about 230 people in my site who will be >> using this box for their proxy, and their usage is all over the map - >> worse, I haven't been given the time to put any analysis tools into >> play to figure out the load on the old box, as we're in the middle of >> a number of other projects of equal or higher priority. >> >> Kurt >> > > I would recommend fBSD 6.3 instead of 7. You don't need it, unless you have > a documented reason it has to be 7.0 Why not? It installed really well, and I've had no issues with it on other machines. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 23:17:05 -0400 David Gurvich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Many of these features have undiscovered bugs that you might > prefer not discovering on your own server. > oh oh. but what if we are just running a plain webserver (mainly static html) and email. we are sticking to ufs of course. it is an older machine - dual 1.3G with 2G ram and a raid card. we've run 7 since the beginning of june on 2 desktops (700Hz with 192M and 128M ram) doing the above serving without any problems and are just about to set up this server to replace the other 2. should we use 7 or think about going with 6.3? -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
There are improvements in the wireless system and in locking. One of the most interesting is the possibility of using zfs and dtrace from Solaris. Many of these features have undiscovered bugs that you might prefer not discovering on your own server. For desktop and laptop use I would certainly have no issues with using 7.0. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 20:39:05 -0500 Ryan Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would recommend fBSD 6.3 instead of 7. You don't need it, unless > you have a documented reason it has to be 7.0 > really?! i thought 7 was supposed to be a big improvement over 6.3: "Dramatic improvements in performance and SMP scalability shown by various database and other benchmarks,in some cases showing peak performance improvements as high as 350% over FreeBSD 6.X under normal loads and 1500% at high loads." http://www.freebsd.org/releases/7.0R/announce.html we've had a lot of trouble though installing 7 on some of our older machines (6.3 is easy and worked well too) because the cdrom doesn't always cooperate. but we got it to work with some extra effort, because we thought it would be better. is it possible that the older versions work better on older machines? -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Configuring an older server for speed...
Kurt Buff wrote: All, I've got a Compaq ML570 with 2gb RAM, dual PIII Xeon 700s and 5x10k RPM drives in it attached to a Compaq 5300 RAID card that I'm going to be using as a squid box. I've configured two drives as RAID 1 with the third as a hot spare, and two drives as RAID0 - I intend to put the squid cache on the latter, and have mounted it as /squid. I'm running 7STABLE from a couple of days ago. What might I do to achieve better/best performance? I'm replacing a less capable whitebox. One of the big issues I've had has manifested itself recently - we've moved from a T1 to a DS3, and while overall throughput has increased dramatically, people are now complaining that "the Internet is slow", which I've found is all down to initial page load. I'm pursuing optimizing squid elsewhere, and want to focus on getting this box as fast as I reasonably can before sticking squid on it. I've got more RAM to put into it - I'd be stealing from another machine that's little used, but I should be able to get it to 4gb RAM. As a benchmark, there are about 230 people in my site who will be using this box for their proxy, and their usage is all over the map - worse, I haven't been given the time to put any analysis tools into play to figure out the load on the old box, as we're in the middle of a number of other projects of equal or higher priority. Kurt I would recommend fBSD 6.3 instead of 7. You don't need it, unless you have a documented reason it has to be 7.0 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Configuring an older server for speed...
All, I've got a Compaq ML570 with 2gb RAM, dual PIII Xeon 700s and 5x10k RPM drives in it attached to a Compaq 5300 RAID card that I'm going to be using as a squid box. I've configured two drives as RAID 1 with the third as a hot spare, and two drives as RAID0 - I intend to put the squid cache on the latter, and have mounted it as /squid. I'm running 7STABLE from a couple of days ago. What might I do to achieve better/best performance? I'm replacing a less capable whitebox. One of the big issues I've had has manifested itself recently - we've moved from a T1 to a DS3, and while overall throughput has increased dramatically, people are now complaining that "the Internet is slow", which I've found is all down to initial page load. I'm pursuing optimizing squid elsewhere, and want to focus on getting this box as fast as I reasonably can before sticking squid on it. I've got more RAM to put into it - I'd be stealing from another machine that's little used, but I should be able to get it to 4gb RAM. As a benchmark, there are about 230 people in my site who will be using this box for their proxy, and their usage is all over the map - worse, I haven't been given the time to put any analysis tools into play to figure out the load on the old box, as we're in the middle of a number of other projects of equal or higher priority. Kurt ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
