New speed benchmark
MailScanner at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Sat Feb 4 11:17:59 GMT 2006
> On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Julian Field wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> On 3 Feb 2006, at 10:36, Res wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2 Feb 2006, DAve wrote:
>>>> Julian Field wrote:
>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>> I forgot to add the MTA is sendmail
>>>>> On 2 Feb 2006, at 14:59, Julian Field wrote:
>>>>>>> Old Signed: 02/02/06 at 14:59:40
>>>>>> I have just done a speed test.
>>>>>> Hardware: dual Opteron, 4Gb RAM, SCSI disk.
>>>>>> Software: RHEL4, MailScanner 4.50, SpamAssassin, DCC, Razor,
>>>>>> MailScanner setup: default
>>>>>> Speed: 770,000 messages per day
>>>> What happens at 780,000 messages a day?
>>> and at what loads
>> Maintained about 10 which is what I would expect.
> 10? I hope to hell its on a 15 yo 5400 rpm ide
> thats only 8 msgs a second, we easily do more than that on dual xeon 2
> gig ram with qmail and qmailscan and the load avgs constant 2-2.5
Not wanting to start a flame war, but does qmailscan do all the HTML
analysis and phishing detection and all the extras you get with
MailScanner? It's far from just being an av wrapper bolted to
SpamAssassin. If I ran it as that, I would get far more messages per
second too. I was running on a default setup, which has all features
switched on. I was trying to produce a useful figure, not a marketing
A load average of 10 is totally acceptable, please read up on what it
actually means, it's not an indicator of CPU load.
However, I agree with you on the qmail support for MailScanner. There is
a company that does all that, I leave them to it as I have never much
liked qmail anyway ;) ;)
Buy the MailScanner book at www.MailScanner.info/store
Professional Support Services at www.MailScanner.biz
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support
PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
More information about the MailScanner