Enterprise scalability

[Michael Baird]

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.

Regards
MIKE

> 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
> > To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> > 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.
> >
>