Hi, I experienced funny stories with Symantec, on Windows, resulting in a discount for another year for my employer and a pat on the back for me.
Some suggestions: - try to identify the tmp folder where Symantec keeps the message while is filtered and see how long is kept there. - for test purpose: try to set a time limit in Symantec (probably you don't have such option). If you do, set a limit of 60 seconds and see if you get any change. - You may find some improvements in disabling some features. Limit the scanning to executables, scripts, archives and documents, instead of scanning all files (pictures, video, audio). - Activate/deactivate DLP and other modules to see if something changes. - You may have depth level scanning too. Regards, Marius. -----Original Message----- From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Xie, Wei Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 8:01 PM To: Wietse Venema Cc: 'postfix-users@postfix.org' Subject: RE: RHEL 5.10 vs 6.4 performancs difference >>> RHEL 5.10 is old. Why are you evaluating it for production? It is very funny to talk about this story. We are running Symantec DLP application 12.0.1 + Postfix 2.6.6 on RHEL 6.4 for outbound emails, which are delivered to FOPE (one windows antispam system - relay=mail.us.messaging.microsoft.com). Sometimes Symantec DLP application consecutively restart its own processes due to unknown reasons. We have tried all solutions from Symantec recommends, but the problem is still not fixed. Finally Symantec tells us their software running on RHEL 6.x is not supported. They only support us only if we downgrade to RHEL 5.8. After we test everything is functional on test/dev servers, we choose one production to downgrade to RHEL 5.10 and do real production trial. But performance is not good. The time for outbound emails in queue is too long. We need address the root cause. That's why I sent this email to ask for help. >>> Are you sure you did not swap the 5.10 and 6.4 release names? I am sure I did not swap the 5.10 and 6.4 release names. The Postfix-2.3.3 is bundled with RHEL 5.10 whereas Postfix-2.6.6 is bundled with RHEL 6.4. To turn on TLS on Postfix-2.3.3, I see some errors on the log /var/log/maillog. To get approval from Symantec that they support all releases of Postfix on RHEL 5.10, we upgrade Postfix-2.3.3 to Postfix-2.6.6, which is same as on our other RHEL 6.4 servers. Thanks, Carl -----Original Message----- From: Wietse Venema [mailto:wie...@porcupine.org] Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 11:50 AM To: Xie, Wei Cc: 'postfix-users@postfix.org' Subject: RHEL 5.10 vs 6.4 performancs difference Xie, Wei: > Need help!!! > > We are using Postfix-2.6.6 with TLS running on RHEL 5.10 for production trial. > > From the email delivery log, we see delay 967 seconds. > > Apr 28 11:03:18 cio-krc-pf03 postfix/smtp[5015]: 9934181190: > to=<turek...@buckeyemail.osu.edu>, > relay=mail.us.messaging.microsoft.com[216.32.181.178]:25, delay=967, > delays=0/964/1.5/1.3, dsn=2.6.0, status=sent (250 2.6.0 > <27520027.166481398696426625.javamail.erequest.do.not.re...@osu.edu> > [InternalId=9787221] Queued mail for delivery) This needs 1.5 seconds for the TCP, SMTP and TLS handhake, and 1.3 seconds to deliver the message. RHEL 5.10 is old. Why are you evaluating it for production? > We have other servers running Postfix-2.6.6 with TLS on RHEL 6.4 and > email delivery is very fast below. The parameters for TLS and other > default parameters are same as above Postfix running on RHEL > 5.10 server. > > Apr 28 10:58:11 cio-krc-pf07 postfix/smtp[16802]: 64DA2500066: to=<neff....@buckeyemail.osu.edu>, relay=mail.us.messaging.microsoft.com[216.32.180.22]:25, delay=0.72, delays=0/0/0.28/0.44, dsn=2.6.0, status=sent (250 2.6.0 <fafe453d676b3e3e740bc382f3bfc...@careers-osu-csm.symplicity.com> [InternalId=19618080] Queued mail for delivery). This needs 0.28 for the TCP, SMTP and TLS handhake, and it also uses less time to deliver mail. With less time needed to do the job, less mail piles up in the Postfix queue. If the same Postfix version and configuration different results on different OS distributions, then it is a good bet that the OS distribution is causing the difference, and that this requires Viktor to look into what may be causing this. Are you sure you did not swap the 5.10 and 6.4 release names? Wietse
