At 12:56 PM +0300 2006-07-24, Naglaa El-Deeb wrote:
I am looking for suggestions on a hardware purchase.
See FAQ 1.15 and 1.24. Start at
http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py if you don't know what I'm
talking about.
--
Brad Knowles, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Those who would give up
On 12/07/2002 06:34:00 alex wetmore wrote:
Various companies, such as cenatek.com, make hardware that meet these
requirements. It isn't very affordable though, and most servers would
probably do just as well with a well thought out RAID array (that
means avoiding RAID 5, which has very poor
On Friday 12 July 2002 01:34 am, alex wetmore wrote:
Here is the important section:
[...]
Thanks for the additional information.
Scott
--
---+--
Scott Courtney | I don't mind Microsoft making money. I mind them
On Thursday 11 July 2002 09:13 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agree with all that. Am using Compaq 380, 5 x 36 Gb hard discs and
hardware Raid5, 1Gb RAM and 512Mb swap, Reiserfs.
However on these machines mailman is sending batches of mail to separate
MTA/relays.
That's a good idea, too,
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 08:43:06 -0400
Scott Courtney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 11 July 2002 12:14 am, J C Lawrence wrote:
a) Add more RAM. Number of queue runners for your MTA
Here's a silly question: Is it worth considering *really* upping the
RAM, say to two gigabytes, and then
On Thu, 2002-07-11 at 16:59, J C Lawrence wrote:
[I have reordered the quotes here - sorry if I have broken the meaning]
Journalling actually is a loss in this sort of scenario due to the extra
tracking and buffer copy overhead. The nice thing about ReiserFS and
XFS in particular is that the
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 09:39:00 -0400
Scott Courtney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 11 July 2002 09:13 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
In that kind of an environment, my idea for a RAMDISK-based
/var/spool/mqueue might not be so far-fetched, on the Mailman machine
iteslf, because the mail
On Thursday 11 July 2002 11:59 am, J C Lawrence wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 08:43:06 -0400
Scott Courtney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 11 July 2002 12:14 am, J C Lawrence wrote:
a) Add more RAM. Number of queue runners for your MTA
Here's a silly question: Is it worth
On 11 Jul 2002 17:14:36 +0100
Nigel Metheringham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2002-07-11 at 16:59, J C Lawrence wrote:
[I have reordered the quotes here - sorry if I have broken the
meaning]
Hehn. A favoured habit of mine.
But full data journalling on an MTA type system can gain you
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 13:32:35 -0400
Scott Courtney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 11 July 2002 11:59 am, J C Lawrence wrote:
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 08:43:06 -0400
And from your comments, it appears that my first suspicion of my own
idea was correct: it's not practical. Thanks for the
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Scott Courtney wrote:
On Thursday 11 July 2002 01:42 pm, J C Lawrence wrote:
You might to look over the RFCs for SMTP and pay particular attention to
the bits about guarantees and transaction handling.
[...]
It tends to define a whole lot of sync() and
On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Tim Crouch wrote:
I am looking for suggestions on a hardware purchase. I am setting up a
new mailing list server for our University. It will host up to 500 lists
ranging from 2 subscribers to 3000 with an average of under 200. We
will archive no more than 1 year's worth
On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 13:12:27 -0600
Tim Crouch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am looking for suggestions on a hardware purchase. I am setting up
a new mailing list server for our University. It will host up to 500
lists ranging from 2 subscribers to 3000 with an average of under 200.
We will
13 matches
Mail list logo
