Am 08.01.2013 20:51, schrieb Viktor Dukhovni: > On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 02:39:17PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote: > >> Viktor Dukhovni: >>> On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 01:08:21PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote: >>> >>>> I could add an option to treat this in the same manner as "failure >>>> to connect" errors (i.e. temporarily skip all further delivery to >>>> this site). However, this must not be the default strategy, because >>>> this would hurt the far majority of Postfix sites which is not a >>>> bulk email sender. >>> >>> Such a feedback mechanism is a sure-fire recipe for congestive >>> collapse: >> >> That depends on their average mail input rate. As long as they can >> push out the mail from one input burst before the next input burst >> happens, then it may be OK that the output flow stutters sometimes. > > This is most unlikely. The sample size before the remote side clamps > down is likely small, so the effective throughput per throttle > interval will be very low. > > If Postfix backs off initially for 5 minutes, it will fully drain > the active queue to deferred, then get a handfull of messages > through, then backoff for 10 minutes (doubling each time up to the > maximal_backoff_time). This won't push out 50k messages/day
you missed the PER DESTINATION * not "initially" * not globally * after CONFIGUREABLE temporary messages to the same destination on a dedicated MTA for newsletters it would even improve in many cass the amount of messages per day and your whole rputation of the ip-address you are sending from on a NORMAL mailserver with human senders it would make no sense thats why such thing must not be default but would be nice to have
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
