mailscanner, queue & nfs

[Glenn Steen]

On 18/03/2008, Glenn Steen <glenn.steen at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 17/03/2008, Alessandro Dentella <sandro at e-den.it> wrote:
>
> > > You *really* don't want to get into the game of NFS-mounting Postfix
>  >  > mail queues. You are asking for a world of pain.
>  >
>  >
>  > ok, got it...
>  >
>  >
>  >  > You have 2 boxes (your intended Postfix box and your intended
>  >  > MailScanner box). Why not just run Postfix+MailScanner on them both and
>  >  > have 2 identically-weighted MX records pointing to them? Uses the same
>  >  > amount of hardware for the same number of messages, gets rid of all your
>  >  > locking problems, and will work :-)
>  >
>  >
>  > just to explain. I have 2 boxes *now* not at the end, unless I understand I
>  >  definitely need them. And I need to get to a solution before tomorrow...
>  >
>
> Ok.
>  I'd spend a buck on having things split over a few boxes. Saves you
>  trouble in the end.:-)
>
> >
>  >  I really want to get to a situation out of emergency in which to study
>  >  better why if I enable dns (spamassassin settings) everything goes so slow,
>  >  MailScanner processes Checking with spam list and so on.
>  >
>
> Ah. Now we see a real problem!:-).
>  Do you run a caching only DNS on the box? Does it work? Really sure
>  you use it, not only have it running? (<Blush> Couldn't be experience
>  talking there.... now could it...</Blush>:-)
>
>  Advice: Minimize the number of lists you check in MailScanner... They
>  are done in serial fashion, so at the most use one or two that you
>  know are a) reliable and b) fast. Best is to use none (if you want a
>  simple yes/no, use it in Posttfix, else use SA to score them instead).
>  Above all else make sure you aren't using a dead one. That will surely
>  kill your performance big time.
>
>
>  >  Tha's the only reason why I wanted to split *temporarily* the services.
>
>
> Then lets look at that problem instead of aquiring new ones, shall we?:-D
>
>
>  >
>  >  Would the same problems arise with imap server if I have a server for
>  >  postfix/mailscanner dropping files in an nfs mounted dir for courier imap/pop?
>
> Depends on the imap SW used. I'd not go there... See my previous post:-).
FFW reading there... Courier, hmmm, Should probably work. But then...
That one is pretty light. Unless the system is seriously starved on IO
resources... And your users have trillions of messages littering
it:-).
Anyway, do the simple thing: Make a GW, make sure it isn't having teh
same problems wrt DNS as the current one, slide it in...:-)

BTW, you do reject unknown recipients and all that?
Cheers
-- 
-- Glenn
email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se