Enterprise scalability

Michael Baird mike at TC3NET.COM
Wed Feb 25 21:41:10 GMT 2004

You would need a lot of mighty boxes to handle that kind of volume. I
use blades, so when my volume gets to a certain level, I just image in
another one, and mx to it as well (to a centralized NFS spool). My
blades are PIII-1200, I can handle without delay running
mailscanner/spamassassin, and using tmpfs for the queue.in 200,000 per
day, I'm using McAfee to do virus scanning as well, the machines only
handle inbound mail, no outbound relay is allowed.


> If I were implementing in this type of environment, I would break it
> up into more manageable chunks.  First, figure out roughly how many
> messages are processed each day.  If you are expecting 500,000 users
> who will receive on average 75 messages per day you are looking at
> about 37,500,000 messages per day (that's a lot of mail).  You can
> build boxes fairly cheaply for handling a fraction of that mail, say
> 1,000,000 messages per day.  Get yourself 40 boxes, some load
> balancing tools, a way to manage the configuration files easily and
> you are in business.  There were some threads within the past 3 months
> about average load with hardware descriptions that you will find
> somewhat helpful.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Forrest Aldrich [mailto:forrie at FORRIE.COM]
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 1:01 PM
> > Subject: Enterprise scalability
> >
> >
> > I'm looking to evaluate a scalable scanning solution - the
> > tune of 100's of thousands of users - and I wonder if anyone
> > here can share their successes (and nightmares) with regard
> > to MailScanner and its auxiliary
> > tools (SA is another worry).   I'm looking into Qmail at
> > first, as we've
> > a need for virtual mailboxes (5 per user), etc.
> >
> > I'm concerned about how perl might behave in this type of
> environment.
> >
> >
> > Thanks.
> >

More information about the MailScanner mailing list