Measuring spare capacity

Martin Hepworth martinh at SOLID-STATE-LOGIC.COM
Wed Dec 8 09:42:11 GMT 2004 

Hi

Do you have duplicate test system to 'play with'?

That way you can do some repeatable tests with the same emails to
measure trip points etc.

I've done performance related issues one other system (Solaris/RDBMS's
mainly) but not Linux or heavy MailScanner stuff.

the MRTG stuff will only to show 5 min peaks and averages when you
really need something a little more granular.

If you want to take this off list for a bit we can chat...

--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300


MailScanner wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> Thank you for your quick response.
>
> Two dual Xeon HT machines with 2GB RAM running Fedora Core and sendmail.
> We have tuned the systems for performance already.
>
> It's not so much that we want to get more performance out of the system,
> (although that would be nice). We rather want to be able to do some
> capacity planning.
>
> When we have a problem with the service all we see is a spike in the
> number of messages in mqueue.in. It seems that the systems have a 'trip
> point'. Before this point they are able to keep the queue down to one or
> two, after it the queue rockets to thousands of messages.
>
> I'm after a metric I can get from the systems which tells me how far I
> am away from this 'trip point'. Something like: 'the current load is
> 5000 messages per hour. The system will trip at 7500 messages per hour'.
> The load, CPU and memory graphs in MRTG are flat, apparently random or
> spiking with the queue. I don't have any figures that show that the
> system has less spare capacity during the day compared to the middle of
> the night, which is what I expect to see.
>
> If we can work out the spare capacity, then we can plan for additional
> system(s) to ensure that we do not run into trouble.
>
> Bart...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MailScanner mailing list [mailto:MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On
> Behalf Of Martin Hepworth
> Posted At: 07 December 2004 15:44
> Posted To: MailScanner
> Conversation: Measuring spare capacity
> Subject: Re: Measuring spare capacity
>
> Hi
>
> what hardware and what OS/MTA???
>
> what performance tuning have you done
>
> what does load average look like?
>
> might want to reduce batch set and max children to see how it gets
> on..theses params are very much trial and error...
>
> --
> Martin Hepworth
> Snr Systems Administrator
> Solid State Logic
> Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300
>
>
> MailScanner wrote:
>
>>I am trying to get a handle on the amount of spare capacity in my MS
>>boxes.
>>
>>We are running two MS which handle about 250,000 messages by day (MRTG
>>count by recipient). The 'Max Unscanned Messages Per Scan' and Max
>>Unsafe Messages Per Scan' are both set at 50 and max children at 15.
>>
>>I isolated a day's worth of maillog entries out of a rotated file and
>>looked at some stats. Counting all instances of 'Found X messages
>>waiting' I found that 75% had just one message, 17% two, 5% three and
>>the more populous batches hardly registering at all. Doing the same
>
> for
>
>>'Scanning X messages' I found a slightly wider spread but tapering off
>>quickly after 15.
>>
>>These are the distributions for the first 15 counts:
>>
>>New Batch: Scanning $a messages,
>>1       36153
>>2       8187
>>3       2188
>>4       767
>>5       319
>>6       139
>>7       70
>>8       45
>>9       18
>>10      11
>>11      17
>>12      6
>>13      4
>>14      3
>>15      5
>>
>>Found $a messages waiting
>>1       0
>>2       7545
>>3       7019
>>4       5126
>>5       3484
>>6       2535
>>7       1724
>>8       1238
>>9       915
>>10      618
>>11      489
>>12      372
>>13      260
>>14      211
>>15      161
>>
>>This surprised me. I was expecting the batch size to grow during busy
>>periods. It seems that the batch size is generally a single message,
>>even though more messages are waiting to be processed. Looking at log
>>snippets in the mailing list archives confirms that this is common.
>>Looking at the time distribution of (rather rare) larger batches I
>
> found
>
>>these spread randomly over the day.
>>
>>We regularly get a peak in the incoming messages queue of a few
>>thousands of messages. This makes me believe that there is not that
>
> much
>
>>slack in the capacity. During these peaks the number of messages per
>>batch does go up to the maximum.
>>
>>Is there a way to measure how many more messages per day a given
>
> system
>
>>can take?
>>
>>Thanks for any ideas.
>>
>>Bart...
>>
>>------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
>>To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
>>'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
>>Before posting, read the MAQ (http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/) and
>>the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).
>>
>>Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
>
>
> **********************************************************************
>
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
> the system manager.
>
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept
> for the presence of computer viruses and is believed to be clean.
>
> **********************************************************************
>
> ------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
> To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
> 'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
> Before posting, read the MAQ (http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/) and
> the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).
>
> Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!
>
> ------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
> To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
> 'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
> Before posting, read the MAQ (http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/) and
> the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).
>
> Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!

**********************************************************************

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept
for the presence of computer viruses and is believed to be clean.

**********************************************************************

------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
Before posting, read the MAQ (http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/) and
the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!

More information about the MailScanner mailing list