Russell Nelson wrote:
The problem, simply enough, is that you should try very, very hard not
to have a separate copy of the email on the disk. If you're running
qmail-inject on each message, then yes, three machines aren't going to
be enough. On the other hand, three machines of the
Mark Delany wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 02:38:38PM -0400, John R Levine wrote:
I have a spam-like application that will be sending out thousands of
customized single-recipient messages. (It's spam-like because it says
you wrote to us about on , but unlike spam, they really
Mark Delany wrote:
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 08:29:37AM +, Greg Cope wrote:
I used IO::select to handle running multiple qmail-remotes at the same
time. qmail-remote has a really small footprint so you can run 1000s
of them concurrently on a modest sized server. It takes a fair
Andy Bradford wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 15:11:43 PDT, "Steve Quezadas" wrote:
Non-authoritative answer:
pcrush.com MX preference = 5, mail exchanger = 63.204.40.234
I could be wrong, but I believe that MX records are supposed to be
names not IP addresses. This could be part of
Dear All
I've just noticed something on one of my qmail boxes is that it seems to
reuse msg numbers for example:
@40003aaf6c250f34dc44 new msg 325819
@40003aaf6c250f386e54 info msg 325819: bytes 478 from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] qp 11462 uid 504
@40003aaf6c25104fb284 starting delivery 3:
Mark Delany wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 01:14:43PM +, Greg Cope wrote:
Dear All
I.e msg no 325819 has been reused twice.
Everything appears ok - is this something to worry about ?
No. It's entirely normal. The msg number is the inode. inodes get
reused by Unix when
Alex Kramarov wrote:
Hello.
I have to provide a solution to a series of mail servers
(geographically distributed), serving from 2 to 10
users. Every server will support 1 primary (virtual) domain, and
probably several small ones. I believe that vpopmail+mysql or
qmail-ldap can
Dave Sill wrote:
"JK" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a Linux 6.2 box with qmail, bind8 and apache on it. It was installed
by a Linux consultant
Ugh. BIND might not be your problem at the moment, but it will be
sooner or later. How could your consultant have been clueful enough to
Ricardo Cerqueira wrote:
On Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 12:28:54PM +, Greg Cope wrote:
tcpserver [ opts ] host port prog
Port being an IP address (or 0 for all) to bind to.
Ert? Almost there. "Host being the address blablabla" is more accurate.
Thanks for the correcti
Clemens Hermann wrote:
Hi
I have a machine with several IP-adresses assigned to it. I installed qmail
with LWQ. Now I want qmail to "listen" just on one IP. At the moment I
can connect on any IP. What about pop3d? Here I would like to achive the
same thing. Thanks in advance.
/ch
Joanne Pons wrote:
I am having trouble sending mail from an application
running on the same server as the mail server. If the
domain/IP of the RECIPIENT is not in the tcp.smtp
list, I get the "553 sorry, that domain isn't in my
list of allowed rcpthosts" error. I've read thetcprules
"Jacques WERNERT" wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to know why I have messages in the queue (ie given by
qmail-qstat) and I don't have as many qmail-remote processes as I've
defined (verified by chkspawn).
I'm running Solaris 7 U60U80.
Thanx for any help
They may have bounced and hence be
Russell Nelson wrote:
I'm considering removing the entire patches section from
www.qmail.org.
Why? Because a patch implies that something is wrong, and needs to be
fixed. However, when someone produces a "patch" for smtp-auth, that
implies that qmail-smtpd has a problem that the patch
Felix von Leitner wrote:
I'd rather see www.qmail.org be changed so that you would have to click
through a banner page that clearly states that none of those patches is
necessary to make qmail any more secure, more reliable or faster.
Please don't cripple my work with qmail in the vain
messages in the queue -
yet they all work fine.
They were all setup using LWQ.
Any clues appreaciated
Regards
Greg Cope
A look at the mailing list archive suggest that qmail-remote is not
going but:
root 254 0.0 0.1 1052 360 ?S 2000 0:00 svscan
root 263 0.0 0.1 1016
Dear All
I am considering using a RAMDISK for /var/qmail/queue by buying another
256 meg DIM, as RAM prices appear to be quite low at the moment ;-)
This is for a personalised (time dependant) newsletter system. The RAM
disk would be made / formatted at boot, along with copying an empty
qmail
Sean Reifschneider wrote:
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 04:20:19PM +, Greg Cope wrote:
Has anyone any empirical evidence for the speed increases I may expect
(as opposed to a fast EIDI (ATA 66, 8.5ms seek) or SCSI system (eg 10k,
5.3 ms seek 25mb/s) ?
10ns is much faster than 5.3ms
Van Liedekerke Franky wrote:
Hi,
I would like to ask if anybody uses qmail in a large scale environment
running on linux (redhat), because I'm interested in how people configured
their system (number of filedescriptors, max childs per process, max running
processes,...)
Could those who
Felix von Leitner wrote:
Thus spake asantos ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
I find MySQL to be reliable and stable.
Good luck to you, then.
You will need it.
You may be wishing alot of people luck as I've used it fir 18 months
with no problems
I only keep logs for 6 months, so in
the
Travis Turner wrote:
Does any one Have a good startup script for qmail on RH 6.2 Linux. The one
that came with the "Running Qmail" book has some sort of error in it. It
basically gives me an error on startup that says line 14 error somewhere
around stop). I would appreciate the help
Russell Nelson wrote:
Ruprecht Helms writes:
At 15:36 09.11.00 +, Russell Nelson wrote:
We need a qmail 1.04.
Is there a new release (qmail 1.04.) in stable version.
No. I'm suggesting that we need a qmail 1.04. It need only change
the documentation. The software is
Dear All
I've setup a qmail / vpopmail combo and added a Virtual domain. This
machine is not connected to the internet (I am using it for local
testing / install scripts for a bunch of servers).
It delivers to know address fine - but when I send a message to a
Sean Reifschneider wrote:
On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 12:53:27PM +, Greg Cope wrote:
Out of interest does the Netfilter have a large / battery backed cache
to decrease the I/O / disk bottle neck ?
Yes. They have a chunk of NVRAM which ACKs the write request as soon as it's
committed
Markus Stumpf wrote:
On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 02:54:10PM -0700, Sean Reifschneider wrote:
That's the problem. It's relatively slow throwing a bunch of messages
into QMail. It doesn't take a very powerful machine to completely swamp
a fairly hefty QMail server, I've found.
I think the
Jeff Mayzurk wrote:
I wrote:
By the way, does anyone have any interest in comparing notes on really high
volume qmail configs? I'm looking for performance in the range of 200-250k
remote deliveries per hour. We're halfway there with relatively few
And Greg Cope replied:
I've
.
Regards
Greg Cope
Thanks,
-Jeff
Greg Jorgensen wrote:
Sometimes we have our mail server busy sending out a lot of newsletters. While
it's doing that any other mail sent through the server has to wait in the
queue. Is there any way to tell qmail that some messages should be processed
and sent before others? Thanks.
As far
component and rack costs than the US, I am not sure.
I would be interested what people on the list have to say, as I am sure
many have been here before.
Greg Cope
--
Jeremy Stanley, Information Security Specialist
this ? you never know you might sell alot
more!
Greg Cope
who would buy a t shirt if the shipping were less than the tshirt!
Greetz, Peter
--
dataloss networks
'/ignore-ance is bliss' - me
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 09:31:22AM +, Greg Cope wrote:
Peter van Dijk wrote:
On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 12:59:41PM -0600, Vern Hart wrote:
For what it's worth, cafepress.com now offers four new products
which I have made available with the qmail
the issues with /dev/children or /dev/mistress ... well I'll shut
up.
I have enjoyed this thread - Thanks.
Greg Cope
--
Regards
Peter
--
Peter Samuel[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.e-smith.org (development)http://www.e-smith.com (corporate)
Phone:
xtra lines to manage a
pool of qmail-remotes to keep up the concurrency you'd want for an
application like this.
I believe that Russ Nelson has done this sort of thing in the past
with great success.
Is there any code avaliable that does this - I'm thinking of doing the
same and would appreciate any h
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Greg Cope wrote:
Well we are now looking at a totaly scalable solution - where we just
add boxes to scale. Generating the emails is simplistic and quick -
injecting into a queue and then processing the queue is the fun part !
it is much
Bruce Guenter wrote:
On Sat, Jul 29, 2000 at 02:17:19PM +, Greg Cope wrote:
My question is thus - When does a host become well connected ?
When the bandwidth required to send its mail is significantly smaller
than the bandwidth available. That is, if you have to send 100,000 5K
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well because of performance issue (Management wanted to send all the
messages out in quite a short time - for reasons as yet unexplained!) we
I'm sure there are lots of valid reasons, for example it might be
a late-breaking news email that ages very rapidly.
ndwidth, the Sun box is in one
of the best connected places in the UK (were "well connected" is usually
an order of magnitude below the US ). I would define well connected at
anything above 512 mbits/sec.
Thanks again.
Greg Cope
still awaiting ADSL to be launched in the U
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here goes on some feed back ...
Very interesting - you seem to have backed up DJb's claims that a well
connected host using single RCPTS is probably as good as one using
multiple RCPTs. I always thought that Multiple would win hands down
One of my
already out there, I dunno. But it was a great learning
experience for me in Qmail, NFS, NIS, network infrastructure between
locations... If anybody is interested in a HOWTO in the future, please
e-mail me personally.
I would be interested just out of curitosity
Greg Cope
Regards
Brett Randall
type, memory
and outbound bandwidth - has any any cluse on what a PIII 600 with 256
meg Ram and a U2W scsi drive will do ?
Any ideas gratefully recieved.
Greg Cope
Thank you,
Thomas
Thomas Duterme - IT manager
Madeforchina.com
___
Direct Line - (8610) 6417 2665
they all have more ram).
Any clues greatfully recieved.
Greg Cope
### log entries ###
Jun 27 08:24:04 mailgate identd[10709]: request_thread: read(11, ...,
1023) failed: Connection reset by peer
Jun 27 08:24:10 mailgate identd[10719]: request_thread: read(11, ...,
1023) failed: Connection reset
through
to the box ?
It all sounds to me a DNS issue - The server is also an internal DNS for
the 20 or so PC's in the office - but this "appears" to be fine.
Any help would be much appreciated.
Greg Cope
41 matches
Mail list logo
