----- Original Message -----
From: "Victor Duchovni" <victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com>
To: <postfix-users@postfix.org>
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 5:15 PM
Subject: Re: Mail drop
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 04:51:17PM -0400, Brandon Hilkert wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: "Victor Duchovni"
<victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com>
To: <postfix-users@postfix.org>
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: Mail drop
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 04:32:43PM -0400, Brandon Hilkert wrote:
The application won't run any faster than the code that serially
parses
the 30GB file. If this code can use a pool of SMTP sender "threads"
and
can parse the file quickly enough, you could try that.
The parsing isn't a bottleneck. It currently sends over 6,000/min and
we
had to actually slow it done intentionally because IIS's SMTP server
was
backing up. So I don't think that's an issue. However, if we just
relaying
the message to the posfix machine,
Postfix can accept mail via SMTP very quickly.
I"m not disputing this fact. I used smtp-source with 10 connections.
Without DKIM signing - 14,634 emails/min
With DKIM signing - 4,762 emails/min
I think we would both agree that that's a large discrepancy.
Yes, but these numbers are much better than what you reported originally,
Very true. I realized my script that I was using to send may have not been
able to send at the speed of what postfix could receive. Also, being single
threaded, I was only seeing a small proportion. After having found the
smtp-source/smtp-sink utilities, I saw much better performance that everyone
had mentioned.
if DKIM consumes all available CPU, find a faster DKIM engine. If DKIM
clobbers the disk capacity, consider placing the working area of the DKIM
process in tmpfs, because neither milters nor SMTP proxies queue mail, so
their need persistent storage.
How are you doing DKIM signing and which resource is consumed, CPU,
disk, memory or network?
I'm using dk-milter and dkim-milter and it's doing it through CPU I think.
Showing atop during the processing, I see a percent or two of CPU during the
transmission, and that's about it. The disk will show up to 20% busy, but
nothing out of the ordinary. Am I missing something?
--
Viktor.
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header.
To unsubscribe from the postfix-users list, visit
http://www.postfix.org/lists.html or click the link below:
<mailto:majord...@postfix.org?body=unsubscribe%20postfix-users>
If my response solves your problem, the best way to thank me is to not
send an "it worked, thanks" follow-up. If you must respond, please put
"It worked, thanks" in the "Subject" so I can delete these quickly.
