AW: Not completely OT: Does this affect MailScanner users on RH/FC/CentOS?

Richard Frovarp richard.frovarp at
Fri Aug 29 21:41:13 IST 2008

Ken A wrote:
> Richard Frovarp wrote:
>> Alex Neuman van der Hans wrote:
>>> How much of an improvement? Can you describe both the test and the 
>>> manual perl compile process and put it up on the wiki?
>> The test doesn't use MailScanner. We have RHEL 4 and RHEL 5 boxes 
>> running MS. Doing the test RHEL 4 is fine, and RHEL5 isn't. However, 
>> we have not noticed any performance difference between the two 
>> releases when it comes to running MS.
> Same here, but with FC6 buggy perl. It would be nice to know if 
> MailScanner is affected in any significant way. Why upgrade perl for 
> new bugs when the old ones work fine?
> Ken
Well my testing and other testing reported back here, seems to indicate 
there isn't a problem. No one has said anything on the SA list. Run that 
test code and add an extra 0 onto the end. RHEL 4 finished in about 4 
seconds. RHEL 5 on a beefier box was only half done after 40 minutes and 
was slowing down. It would appear that when this one hits, it hits very 


More information about the MailScanner mailing list