Hi Victor,

On 2 juin 2010, at 18:49, Victor Duchovni wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 02, 2010 at 05:14:45PM +0200, Proniewski Patrick wrote:
> 
>> So it appears that the connection between MAILGW and LB is not always
>> properly closed. Am I wrong?
> 
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_connection_cache_on_demand
> http://www.postfix.org/CONNECTION_CACHE_README.html
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#connection_cache_ttl_limit

perfect shot. You pinpointed the origin of my timeout issue.
After reading the aforementioned documentation, I've decided I don't need 
connection cache on this particular postfix instance.
I've added to main.cf:

smtp_connection_cache_on_demand = no

and now, timeout count has dropped to 0-5 per hour (due to other smtp server). 
Very nice.


>> smtp_destination_concurrency_limit = 10
> 
> A bit low, especially when most traffic goes to the same place.  I would
> recommend the default of 20 or even 50 in some similar cases. Increasing
> the concurrency limit will likely reduce the backlog and demand for
> cached connections.

Raised to 50

>> smtp_destination_recipient_limit = 15
> 
> This too is likely counter-productive. Decreasing envelope splitting
> will reduce the number of messages and thus demand for cached connections.

Will have to discuss this a little bit later, because I think I have another 
problem that could be related.

>> 15:51:24.276369 F 5721:5721(0)
> 
> Postfix closes the connection two seconds later.
> 
>> 15:51:24.276858 P 205:265(60)
>>      221 co7.domain.tld service closing transmission channel
> 
> The LB or the server behind it violates SMTP by sending an out-of-turn
> SMTP reply.
> 
>> 15:51:24.276910 R
>> 15:51:24.276916 F 265:265(0)
>> 15:51:24.276930 R 4094209693:4094209693(0) win 0
> 
> Postfix is already gone. This is harmless, but the either LB or
> custom mail-server behind it mishandles EOF by sending an out-of-turn
> reply. If you don't want connection caching, turn it off.


load balancer is fine (I've tried two: Nortel 2424 and Cisco+ACE module). The 
proprietary mail-server is to blame, certainly.
Thank you very much for this educative reading of my tcpdump output.


Patrick PRONIEWSKI
-- 
Administrateur Système - SENTIER - Université Lumière Lyon 2

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to