On Sep 3, 2012, at 13:05, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > On 9/3/2012 12:02 AM, DTNX Postmaster wrote: > >> In other words, if 'we strip this back to hypothetical and assume a >> perfect world without any issues', this 'GreenArrow' maxes out at >> 300,000 messages per hour. Postfix can send 10,8 million messages per >> hour, more than 35 times as fast*. > > In all fairness, given your "perfect world" criteria, this ESP would be > moving a lot more mail as well, with no restrictions on the outbound > pipe or at the receiver. > > But as others have correctly pointed out, the issue here isn't MTA > performance, it's administrative performance. The last thread I > responded to demonstrates this. The big advantage ESPs have is their > established relationships with the freemailers and other large mailbox > providers. These allow them greater throughput than the unwashed bulk > sender, at least into the receiver's initial queue.
They aren't my perfect world criteria, but a direct quote from Sam Jones' earlier buzzword compliant reply. It was meant to illustrate the often ridiculous nature of vendor benchmarks, how useless they are in real world situations, and therefore how silly it is to pick software based on theoretical limits you will most likely never hit. Not enough sarcasm, I guess ;-) Cya, Jona
