Marc wrote:
> Actually, the 'multi-day' delay is generally related to posts from ppl
> that aren't subscribed to the lists that I have to approve manually ...
Is there a quick(er) way to 'subscribe, set nomail' on all the mailing lists
that are mirrored to news.postgresql.org?
I prefer to read/p
Hey guys,
Can you move this thread elsewhere?
It's EXTREMELY off topic now.
:(
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> David Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > >ooohh I've been raggin on
> > >Marc on that one for w
Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, David Ford wrote:
>
>>It's all in the configuration. I slam mails around dozens of machines
>>in seconds using sendmail and I process a lot of mail.
>>
>
>So have you patched for the latest of the many sendmail root exploits?
>
>Vince.
>
I keep my sy
On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, David Ford wrote:
> It's all in the configuration. I slam mails around dozens of machines
> in seconds using sendmail and I process a lot of mail.
So have you patched for the latest of the many sendmail root exploits?
Vince.
--
> It's in the configuration. I run much more than the above and have no
> issues at all.
Yeah, some people shouldn't have root even if they own the machine.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgres
David Ford wrote:
>
> Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> >>Mailing lists don't scale well to large numbers of subscribers. I see this
> >>delay constantly,on multiple lists. The bigger the list gets, the slower the
> >>list gets (and the more loaded the server gets, right Marc? :-)).
> >>
> >
> >Note
Vince Vielhaber wrote:
>ooohh I've been raggin on
>Marc on that one for well over a year, maybe two.. I started using
>qmail when it was still in .7something beta and never looked back. The
>folks at Security Focus have moved all of the lists to ezml
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>Both qmail and postfix radically outperform sendmail for large mailing
>list delivery on identical hardware. It seems strange to me to say
>that there is no sendmail issue when sendmail itself is the issue.
>The queuing structure sendmail uses is simply wrong when a sing
>
>
>You are seeing sendmail's poorly designed queuing behaviour in action.
>sendmail limits itself by outgoing messages, rather than outgoing
>deliveries. This causes one slow delivery to hold up many fast
>deliveries.
>
Again, all in the configurationrinse, repeat.
Simply change your queu
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>Mailing lists don't scale well to large numbers of subscribers. I see this
>>delay constantly,on multiple lists. The bigger the list gets, the slower the
>>list gets (and the more loaded the server gets, right Marc? :-)).
>>
>
>Note that the postgresql.org mail serve
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If it was a sendmail issue, by all means, but it isn't so no :)
Both qmail and postfix radically outperform sendmail for large mailing
list delivery on identical hardware. It seems strange to me to say
that there is no sendmail issue when sendmai
Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Mailing lists don't scale well to large numbers of subscribers. I see this
> > delay constantly,on multiple lists. The bigger the list gets, the slower the
> > list gets (and the more loaded the serve
;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 4:24 PM
Subject: [HACKERS] Re: List response time...
> Note that the postgresql.org mail server is still running sendmail.
> In my personal experience with sources.redhat.com, qmail is a much
> better choice to handle large mailing lists
On 21 Aug 2001, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Mailing lists don't scale well to large numbers of subscribers. I see this
> > delay constantly,on multiple lists. The bigger the list gets, the slower the
> > list gets (and the more loaded the server gets,
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> All the delay seems to be in transferring the message from
> postgresql.org to webmail.postgresql.org ... which are the same
> machine, or at least the same IP address. What's up with that?
You are seeing sendmail's poorly designed queuing behaviour in act
Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mailing lists don't scale well to large numbers of subscribers. I see this
> delay constantly,on multiple lists. The bigger the list gets, the slower the
> list gets (and the more loaded the server gets, right Marc? :-)).
Note that the postgresql.org
16 matches
Mail list logo
