Yes maxusers stopped the dmesg errors....it seemed. Only thing I do not
like to much about postfix is that it only tries one MX record and then
does not try any others...."default"....yes there is still backlog with
#'s I gave you. Right now 8 min to get an email from sending...I have
another machine here still with qmail on it....going to try to evenly
distribute the mail between them and see how it goes. I cannot get you
stats from linux box because i wiped it out with freebsd....I will do
everything in my power to keep this box freebsd. Why qmail and linux was
handling the load I will never know now but regardless.....with 600 megs
being pushed a day with all that included backlog .....how many megs do
you think one ide drive can handle will be the biggest question to tackle
over next few days.
here are some stats from postfix:
Grand Totals
------------
messages
230935 received
207928 delivered
2 forwarded
6463 deferred (26561 deferrals)
12780 bounced
20 rejected
672m bytes received
641m bytes delivered
622 senders
399 sending hosts/domains
128216 recipients
21502 recipient hosts/domains
smtpd
109731 connections
14 hosts/domains
5 avg. connect time (seconds)
143:18:25 total connect time
Per-Hour Traffic Summary
time received delivered deferred bounced rejected
--------------------------------------------------------------------
0000-0100 9788 9514 373 430 5
0100-0200 5800 5782 374 352 1
0200-0300 6438 6951 553 361 0
0300-0400 11497 10192 591 420 0
0400-0500 10431 10330 722 492 0
0500-0600 10709 11525 911 591 1
0600-0700 10551 10234 1030 604 3
0700-0800 10952 10231 1035 540 0
0800-0900 12691 9925 922 452 2
0900-1000 12174 12354 1205 645 2
1000-1100 13884 10220 837 465 1
1100-1200 10891 12310 1277 603 0
1200-1300 11661 11210 1402 581 3
1300-1400 11102 11019 1094 1323 1
1400-1500 10822 11027 1669 917 0
1500-1600 12271 9723 1329 752 0
1600-1700 11255 9443 2538 488 0
1700-1800 7160 15538 2206 1073 0
1800-1900 12468 5883 1825 548 1
1900-2000 13329 5737 2303 480 0
2000-2100 11220 7286 1685 543 0
2100-2200 3841 1494 680 120 0
2200-2300 0 0 0 0 0
2300-2400 0 0 0 0 0
hope that helps :)
btw ccd requires 2 other drives am i correct?
So i just remove /var/ basically from fstab ...raid0 2 drives together
and mount that as var...is my basic understanding.
of course of 2 separate controllers......I still don;t see why that
matters whether they are on separate controllers or not but my guess has
to do with IDE unable to multitask idea.....which is leading me to think
that means down one controller?
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Matt Dillon wrote:
> Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 13:31:26 -0800 (PST)
> From: Matt Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Dan Phoenix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Andrew Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Andre Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Rik van Riel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Silbersack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Charles Randall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jos Backus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: vinum and qmail (RE: qmail IO problems)
>
> Well, that's a jump. You never said how bumping maxusers went!
>
> However, we have finally gotten a clue to how much mail you are pushing..
> 600MB in a day. That sure doesn't sound like something I would want
> to run a machine with an IDE drive. Why not just buy one of those
> supercool 2U VALINUX boxes (they can run FreeBSD as easily as Linux)
> and stuff two or three SCSI disks into it?
>
> The disk activity we are seeing here, assuming the file descriptor and
> network issues have been fixed, can only be from the mail traffic and
> the fsync() calls the MTA makes. It's beginning to sound unavoidable,
> and I'm not sure how the linux box could possibly have done better
> short of them not implementing the fsync() system call.
>
> In anycase, while VINUM is great for striping disks I recommend that
> you use CCD to begin with, because CCD is a whole lot less complex.
> You can stripe IDE drives but the two drives must be on different IDE
> controllers (not just primary secondary, but each drive must be primary
> on its own controller). Then striping will help.
>
> Of course, I would not recommend using IDE at all if you are pushing
> 600MB/day in mail. You really should be using a SCSI based system...
> something like the VALINUX boxes (running either Linux or FreeBSD).
>
> I am still interested in mail transfer rate numbers for what you were
> doing on the Linux box verses what you are doing now. With that much
> mail, even a few hours of downtime can create a huge backlog. I am
> not entirely convinced that you aren't seeing the backlog but without
> more information (do you have aggregate statistics from your mail logs
> for the last few months, for example?), it's hard to diagnose.
>
> -Matt
>
> :I went over to postfix to see if it did better.....in fact it did on
> :freebsd but still same problem with I/O. SOlution from talking to some
> :people late last night would be to add another harddrive and stripe it
> :with another drive using vinum. As you all know IDE does not do
> :multitasking unlike scsi. My question is this vinum product...i beleive
> :the superceder of ccd....taking another harddrive and striping it with the
> :root ide drive would in theory destroy all contents of first IDE?
> :Or can this volume manager take say a partition of first ide drive and
> :made to work with another ide drive? Trying to figure out at this point
> :whether concept is 2 other drives striped together say..using raid 0 or
> :I can get away with just one other one. Thx in advance.
> :
> :ps. 600 megs of email was calculated in 1 day on this machine...today i
> :will be splitting up the load and looking into vinum.
> :
> :Regards,
> :
> :Dan
> :
> :
> :On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Andrew Reilly wrote:
> :
> :> Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:12:25 +1100
> :> From: Andrew Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> :> To: Alfred Perlstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> :> Cc: Andre Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> :> Matt Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> :> Rik van Riel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Silbersack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> :> Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> :> Charles Randall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> :> Dan Phoenix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jos Backus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> :> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> :> Subject: Re: soft updates and qmail (RE: qmail IO problems)
> :>
> :> On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 12:13:57PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> :> > * Andre Oppermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010206 12:07] wrote:
> :> > > Does sendmail even use fsync()?
> :> >
> :> > It better. :)
> :>
> :> Quick grep of the sendmail sources shows most of the six fsync
> :> calls protected by a flag (SuperSafe && or nofsync &&). I don't
> :> know what circumstances can provoke either of those flags to be
> :> zero, but if they can be, then it mightn't be doing any fsyncs.
> :>
> :> --
> :> Andrew
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
