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

[Richard Frovarp]

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 
hard.

Richard