Measuring spare capacity

MailScanner mailscanner at SMITS.CO.UK
Wed Dec 8 17:16:38 GMT 2004


Thanks Martin,

Would you mind keeping it on the list for a while longer? I hope to get
a metric out of this which will benefit others too ;-)

I can take one of the systems off-line on a weekend and do some tests
with varying email loads. What would be the easiest way to simulate a
particular load?

I've had another thought; what if I look at all the 'stat=Sent' log
entries and collect their delay values? The amount of time spent
filtering by the MS children would equal the average delay multiplied by
the number of children. The average time between log entries would give
me the time they have available to do that work.

E.g. if I have twenty children handling 1200 messages in an hour then
they each have an average of one minute to work on each message. My
average delay is 50 seconds, so I'm all right under that load.

Wouldn't that give me a ratio indicating the utilisation of the system?
It only gives me information on the messages that are actually passed
on, but those are the ones whose performance I most care about anyway.


Bart...

-----Original Message-----
From: MailScanner mailing list [mailto:MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On
Behalf Of Martin Hepworth
Posted At: 08 December 2004 09:42
Posted To: MailScanner
Conversation: Measuring spare capacity
Subject: Re: Measuring spare capacity

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!

------------------------ 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