jratliff at MIS.NET
Wed Feb 20 16:42:34 GMT 2002
I hate people that "me too", but me too :) We've got a dual 1.4 GHz box
with 4GB or ram that runs consistantly under 2 or 3 load average. But
sometimes when the volme of incoming mail greatly increases, the single
Mailscanner process has a hard time keeping up. I know there are locking
issues, but we would be happy to help work through these and to beta
test code. Thanks.
David Lee wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Ray Gardener wrote:
>Using combined "Deliver In Background = yes" and "Delivery Method = batch"
>(or "Delivery Method = queue") is almost essential at sites with large
>But there is still a weak spot. There can only be one MailScanner process
>(in contrast to the multiple parallel sendmail/whatever processes). So
>any delays here (e.g. DNS name resolution) can cause massive build-ups in
>"Incoming Queue Dir", significantly hindering the entire throughput,
>If Julian has a "wish list" for MailScanner, my plea for its top item is
>to allow multiple MailScanner processes to run.
>We have touched on this subject before; Julian has concerns and worries,
>understandably, about locking issues. But I think it is one of those
>issues that needs to be addressed, now that MailScanner is becoming a
>mainstream product. (I'm tempted to use the sales-droid "industrial
>strength" jargon here...)
>: David Lee I.T. Service :
>: Systems Programmer Computer Centre :
>: University of Durham :
>: http://www.dur.ac.uk/t.d.lee/ South Road :
>: Durham :
>: Phone: +44 191 374 2882 U.K. :
James G. Ratliff
Systems Engineer/Security Analyst
Mikrotec Internet Services
Network Operations Center
1001 Winchester Rd.
Lexington, KY 40505
859-231-1231 Ext. 13
for pgp key.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the MailScanner