Re: Benchmarked tcpserver dlopen() -> qmail_smtpd() VS tcpserver --> fork() --> exec qmail-smtpd
Erwin Hoffmann <[email protected]> Wed, 5 Apr 2017 00:15:52 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.qmail.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi, > Am 05.04.2017 um 00:02 schrieb Manvendra Bhangui <[email protected]>: > > When I went live, the stock qmail was > just not able to handle the deluge of emails. We had around 3 million > customers. The first thing I did was to put multiple queues (instead > of just one /var/qmail/queue). Yes, the funny 'Silly Qmail Syndrom'. André tried to overcome this; me too with a different approach. Anyway, the current store&forward paradigm of emails needs to be redesigned. To put everything on disk and to look THEN who is going to potentially receive the message might no be a clever choice (greetings to IM2000 -;)) in our current 'messaging' world. Regards. --eh. Dr. Erwin Hoffmann | FEHCom | http://www.fehcom.de | PGP Key-Id: EE00CF65
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 842 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJY5BsZAAoJEIP8+SDuAM9lgnUQAJYB+wqDsaVrvPbWbMRH3jtH lpGdgOcJ/tgf1W+/z7bwBP+TAaJYjCdDf7RqUWbFleUlFfdQpVKwXQQ18jvyRJ6Z ubQeUnNYE82EZ9B3yIsFT1Bg7LiJ5gpI3imsskXbF0h5Y8hZCts0CC2p4nPbFDRJ otIO509GRAV0UwiIrWDAtDokKkc9I50KcV/8O+Q2+/6WV8LQg7pKcno/8Rfo0mlq qpDbPnsYDLUQZghl4zL7hrv5F3mH9mQZXMPSvl8XXNzLjhjkLsNYdtq+Bz/6P8Eh xS0Hsk4EXUEN9Shf8/hKodyJ7cNx0gGdY3MWYOJjeBI2C/5K9rmZRZut0fM6SKKS NUYBYdIb/rF2WvOjJnY+o2sMH/ZHSCMrprcrdahNb3162o3fpt09yWrAhRVQ5mBi 6AU3ntuPFODlpaK8i5g3zlMUk7XuaqtS9Vl7RRMQYUXrHqprukrbwwoaP8s6kXN9 FYI3EpjwORJJcD15MgP3pye3FI6NN8igjhM6Ff0eE+p5TwqXM90bd1jeO90yEVhk S/ayAyqXUV0wYo1Py1clPyzH06rUJHT6ZlShRTsB+VnJFabXXD33LFjjol4hKnKM nY+220Ydh+XGMUrRemfiLctOjuiVxF9BoD1EHqxYiJzbU6kXrgrmGdihWJ1e73M9 sGoCjiGp2LYu0Tm4MF4z =7S9n -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----