Hey guys,
Can you move this thread elsewhere?
It's EXTREMELY off topic now.
:(
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> David Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > >ooohh I've been raggin on
> > >Marc on that one for w
On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, David Ford wrote:
> It's all in the configuration. I slam mails around dozens of machines
> in seconds using sendmail and I process a lot of mail.
So have you patched for the latest of the many sendmail root exploits?
Vince.
--
> It's in the configuration. I run much more than the above and have no
> issues at all.
Yeah, some people shouldn't have root even if they own the machine.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgres
David Ford wrote:
>
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> >>Mailing lists don't scale well to large numbers of subscribers. I see this
> >>delay constantly,on multiple lists. The bigger the list gets, the slower the
> >>list gets (and the more loaded the server gets, right Marc? :-)).
> >>
> >
> >Note
Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>ooohh I've been raggin on
>Marc on that one for well over a year, maybe two.. I started using
>qmail when it was still in .7something beta and never looked back. The
>folks at Security Focus have moved all of the lists to ezml
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>Both qmail and postfix radically outperform sendmail for large mailing
>list delivery on identical hardware. It seems strange to me to say
>that there is no sendmail issue when sendmail itself is the issue.
>The queuing structure sendmail uses is simply wrong when a sing
>
>
>You are seeing sendmail's poorly designed queuing behaviour in action.
>sendmail limits itself by outgoing messages, rather than outgoing
>deliveries. This causes one slow delivery to hold up many fast
>deliveries.
>
Again, all in the configurationrinse, repeat.
Simply change your queu
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>Mailing lists don't scale well to large numbers of subscribers. I see this
>>delay constantly,on multiple lists. The bigger the list gets, the slower the
>>list gets (and the more loaded the server gets, right Marc? :-)).
>>
>
>Note that the postgresql.org mail serve
Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Mailing lists don't scale well to large numbers of subscribers. I see this
> > delay constantly,on multiple lists. The bigger the list gets, the slower the
> > list gets (and the more loaded the serve
I've had great luck with Postfix as well.
-Mitch
- Original Message -
From: "Ian Lance Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Lamar Owen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Serguei Mokhov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "PostgreSQL Hackers"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 4:24 PM
Subject: [HAC
On 21 Aug 2001, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Mailing lists don't scale well to large numbers of subscribers. I see this
> > delay constantly,on multiple lists. The bigger the list gets, the slower the
> > list gets (and the more loaded the server gets,
11 matches
Mail list logo
