A few questions I can't find in archive...

Steve Freegard steve.freegard at LBSLTD.CO.UK
Sat Feb 28 23:49:22 GMT 2004

Hi Nick,

>>> third party stuff such as MailWatch only support Sendmail

MailWatch works fine with Exim - it will support any MTA - it's just that I
use sendmail myself, so a coule of the features only support sendmail
(displaying the mail queue and storing the relay information) as I haven't
had a box to test with other MTA's yet.

Kind regards,

-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Nelson
Sent: 2/27/04 11:27 PM
Subject: Re: A few questions I can't find in archive...

David H. wrote:

> While I am a sendmail fan myself, Exim is the choice to go with
> MailScanner. This is something Julian can explain more about, yet he
> says, that it is the fastest MTA together with MailScanner.

Okay, I'll have to research exim routing of mail (the equivalant of
mailtables?) better than. I was kinda getting the idea from posts that
it wasn't as good as sendmail, and with the third party stuff such as
MailWatch only support Sendmail, it was a bit confusing, I'm more
famialr with Exim (although not the routing aspect) anyhow.

> One other
> thing that comes to mind, is that you will definitely want RAID when
> comes to building a large MailServer. You will most likely also want a
> raid with many disks, so that you can spread RAID slices either onto
> multiple disks or set them to be on particular disks.

I typically do RAID5 with 3 disks, this machine setup I'm going to use
is tested with Fedora and works well, so we'll ignore the possibilities
(for now) of SATA support not being good. However, is RAID5 best, or
should we go with RAID0? RAID0 would toast any SCSI, but there's no
redundancy. However, how much need for redundancy is there? I can do
nightly offsite backups as needed to a NAS for the config files.

> This is very useful when you have large queues and you split them up,
> those setting queues onto separate physical disks or disk areas which
> will speed up the whole I/O process in the long run. A lot of RAM is
> also useful with MailScanner since you can basically do all the
> unpacking of a message in RAM which saves you a lot of Disk I/O

I think I've settled on two gigs, not much more than one gig, and seems
to help a lot.

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 sender and delete the message from your mailbox.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MailScanner (www.mailscanner.info) for the presence of computer viruses.

More information about the MailScanner mailing list