<div dir="ltr"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2008/8/29 Ken A <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ka@pacific.net">ka@pacific.net</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">Richard Frovarp wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Alex Neuman van der Hans wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
How much of an improvement? Can you describe both the test and the manual perl compile process and put it up on the wiki?<br>
</blockquote></blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
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.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
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?<br>
<br>
Ken<font color="#888888"></font></blockquote><div>LOL!:-)<br><br>Question is if we do anything where the affected calls would be able to dominate over the normal "slowness" of things... Like DNS/BLs etc... I'm not that sure that we would see anything significant enough to separate it from all the other latency:)<br>
</div></div><br>Cheers<br>-- <br>-- Glenn<br>email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com<br>work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se<br>
</div>