On 10/28/20 2:38 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
One possible way out is to skip the Postfix sendmail command, and
to use a "mini sendmail" program that submits mail via SMTP.
adding an msmtp sender as the VirusAction script in clamav milter, though a bit
of 'extra', certainly is the simplest.
easy
On 10/28/20 2:38 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
One possible way out is to skip the Postfix sendmail command, and
to use a "mini sendmail" program that submits mail via SMTP.
i've typically got msmtp rattling around.
Obviously that will fail when Postfix is down.
noted.
not ideal, but not critic
PGNet Dev:
> my clamav-milter.conf includes
>
> VirusAction /usr/local/etc/clamav/scripts/virus-alert.sh
>
> where that script _does_ invoke sendmail.
>
> found this process
>
> ps ax | grep virus
> 15670 ?S 0:00 /bin/bash
> /usr/local/etc/clamav/scripts/
On 10/28/20 11:36 AM, PGNet Dev wrote:
On 10/28/20 11:30 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
You might start with:
# grep -r NoNewPrivileges /etc/systemd
i couldn't find any direct, relevant postdrop/maildrop, or NoNewPrivileges,
references i chased sendmail usage instances instead.
i've clamav
On 10/28/20 11:30 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
You might start with:
# grep -r NoNewPrivileges /etc/systemd
and all other directories with systemd unit files.
yup. already done.
nothing --other than the now "=false" (need to double check if that's the same
as _removing_ it ) in pflogsum
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:22:55AM -0700, PGNet Dev wrote:
> On 10/28/20 10:32 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> > Indeed a process with "no_new_privs" will not be able to run sendmail(1)
> > to submit new email.
>
> noted.
>
> that said, this _just_ reappeared here,
>
>postfix/postdrop[15673]: w
On 10/28/20 10:32 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
Indeed a process with "no_new_privs" will not be able to run sendmail(1)
to submit new email.
noted.
that said, this _just_ reappeared here,
postfix/postdrop[15673]: warning: mail_queue_enter: create file
maildrop/678088.15673: Permission denied
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 06:19:10PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > Barring interference from SELinux or AppArmour, ... this should not
> > happen unless file permissions change.
>
> Maybe this was true ten years ago, but it is not longer. The OP even
> mentioned something called "no new privileg
Hi Viktor
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 01:00:35PM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 09:01:38AM -0700, PGNet Dev wrote:
> > Oct 28 15:02:40 svr019 postfix/postdrop[64624]: warning:
> > mail_queue_enter: create file maildrop/553726.64624: Permission denied
> > Oct 28 15:02:
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 10:13:23AM -0700, PGNet Dev wrote:
> > For reference, on my system:
> >
> > $ postconf setgid_group
> > setgid_group = maildrop
> > $ ls -ld /var/spool/postfix/maildrop
> > drwx-wx--- 2 postfix maildrop 2 Oct 28 12:52
> > /var/spool/postfix/maildrop
On 10/28/20 10:00 AM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 09:01:38AM -0700, PGNet Dev wrote:
Oct 28 15:02:40 svr019 postfix/postdrop[64624]: warning:
mail_queue_enter: create file maildrop/553726.64624: Permission denied
Oct 28 15:02:45 svr019 postfix/postdrop[32688]
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 09:01:38AM -0700, PGNet Dev wrote:
> Oct 28 15:02:40 svr019 postfix/postdrop[64624]: warning:
> mail_queue_enter: create file maildrop/553726.64624: Permission denied
> Oct 28 15:02:45 svr019 postfix/postdrop[32688]: warning:
> mail_queue_enter: create file ma
I am generally using postfix-logwatch for tracking log files.
However, I was thinking about something that is working in real time,
scripts can be run by cron in some period time.
Then the best solution could be write some syslog phraser or redirect
syslog to some
application eg. written in Java t
I am generalny using postfix-logwatch for tracking log files.
However, I was thinking about something that is working in real time,
scripts can be run by cron in some period time.
Then the best could be write some syslog phraser or redirect syslog to some
application eg. written in Java to interpr
j.emerlik:
> I would like have policy service that will be able to write do data base
> some information eg. when exactly message was sent, message ID, DSN if
> soemthing goes wrong. That means it should be working with Postfix queue.
You can use "postqueue -j" to get a machine-readable queue lis
Viktor Dukhovni:
>
>
> > On Feb 12, 2018, at 10:06 AM, j.emerlik wrote:
> >
> > It is possible to write some policy service that will be working with
> > postfix queue ?
>
> No. That's a bad idea anyway. To track message flow, parse the logs.
The closest that comes to this is a daemon that
On 12.02.2018 16:44, j.emerlik wrote:
> I would like have database and there information : Message ID, Sent
> Date (or last date of send trying), DSN, number of send attempts,
> Mail_From, RCPT_TO.
That type of information should be extracted from the Postfix logs,
as existing tools like 'pflogsu
I would like have database and there information : Message ID, Sent Date
(or last date of send trying), DSN, number of send attempts, Mail_From,
RCPT_TO.
It would be helpful to create statistics or check exacly what happened
with the messages sent, eg, six months ago.
2018-02-12 16:22 GMT+01:0
> On Feb 12, 2018, at 10:06 AM, j.emerlik wrote:
>
> It is possible to write some policy service that will be working with postfix
> queue ?
No. That's a bad idea anyway. To track message flow, parse the logs.
--
Viktor.
Hi, I would think you could write a script to do what you need ?
Here is one I use that is in Python.
[root@mta3 alf02013]# Summary
Usage: Summary -s -h {-|POSTFIX_LOG} [ POSTFIX_LOG .. ]
Summarize postfix mail log. Gzipped files are OK.
Print one line for each delivered email, wi
On 12.02.2018 16:06, j.emerlik wrote:
> I would like have policy service that will be able to write do data
> base some information eg. when exactly message was sent, message ID,
> DSN if soemthing goes wrong. That means it should be working with
> Postfix queue.
That's not really a specific desc
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 01:14:17AM -0800, Robert Wolfe wrote:
> "I read that postifx will retry emails for 5 days before it will stop and
> email will be removed from the queue. That is too much.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5321#section-4.5.4.1
Retries continue until the message is transmi
Peter:
> Hi lads (and girls),
>
> Is there an easy way to set the auto-replies (or answers, not sure how
> are they called) in postfix like greylist does "come back later", or
> "try the next available MX gateway" when my queue size reaches a certain
> amount? It often happens that my primary MX
kshitij mali:
> Hi All,
>
>
> I am in condition of worst and had bad luck .
>
> my postfix queue data got increased to 850MB in size that is
> "/data/postfix/queue" directory
> all mail in this directory got stuck because the server hardware is down i
> had removed that hard drive and attached t
Thank u guys,
Mean taking proper care to the permissions and requeuing the file will sort
the problem ,
this was just my imaginary condition that i was thought in worst case ,
does any one realy face and does the solution?
Thanks & Regards,
Kshitij
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Stan Hoeppn
On 4/12/2012 11:51 PM, kshitij mali wrote:
> my postfix queue data got increased to 850MB in size that is
> "/data/postfix/queue" directory
> all mail in this directory got stuck because the server hardware is down i
> had removed that hard drive and attached to another linux server and
> configur
On 2010-12-29 10:14 AM, Joan Moreau wrote:
> But I have no " car to fix" . What is that story about ?
In your first post, you vaguely described a 'problem':
"the postfix queue manager (qmgr) is taking far too much resources when
the number of email pending is growing."
> Now, I did not rule out
On 12/29/2010 9:14 AM, Joan Moreau wrote:
Can you just tell me how to put the mailing queue in a DB
(mysql database in my case) ?
Yes, rewrite postfix to use a DB as a backend rather than a
file system. This will be a major redesign and not just a
plugin. No one else is working on such a p
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 10:14:49 -0500, Joan Moreau wrote:
> Can you just tell me how to put
> the mailing queue in a DB (mysql database in my case) ?
you may simply deploy MySQLfs (FUSE+MySQL) if you do not mind
speeds, loads,...etc.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mysqlfs/
pgp7HNgIbhXrK.pgp
Des
On 12/29/10 4:14 PM, Joan Moreau wrote:
But I have no " car to fix" . What is that story about ?
Now, I did not rule out anything in any email.
Can you just tell me how to put the mailing queue in a DB (mysql
database in my case) ?
Exactly which part of NO YOU CAN NOT PUT THE QUEUE IN A D
But I have no " car to fix" . What is that story about ?
Now, I did
not rule out anything in any email.
Can you just tell me how to put
the mailing queue in a DB (mysql database in my case) ?
On Wed, 29 Dec
2010 18:04:45 +1100, James Gray wrote:
> On 29/12/2010, at 4:02 PM,
Joan Moreau wr
On 2010-12-29 Joan Moreau wrote:
> Well, I am surprised by the tone of those emails.
I, on the other hand, am very surprised, how you're consistently avoid
giving this list any details about your configuration or your actual
problem.
Please either supply the information you've been asked for (se
On 29/12/2010, at 4:02 PM, Joan Moreau wrote:
> Well, I am surprised by the tone of those emails.
Why? Do you tell you mechanic how to fix your car before he's even been
informed what vehicle you drive?
> I am just asking if it exists a back-end that would replace the storage and
> management
Well, I am surprised by the tone of those emails.
I am just asking
if it exists a back-end that would replace the storage and management of
the queue into mysql (i.e. put /var/spool/postfix into mysql tables).
(yes, a file system is made for storing files, but it is not at all
made to execute
Joan Moreau put forth on 12/28/2010 3:29 PM:
>
>
> Well, no need to get angry.
No one is angry. You're misreading "tone" as you're not a regular
member of this list. Replace "angry" with "direct" and you've got the
correct tone.
> I am just looking for a MySQL bakcend to replace the hard-disk
> On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 12:28:57 -0500 (EST), Wietse Venema wrote:
>
>> Joan Moreau:
>>> Well, more clearly, my question is : How can I plug Mysql as a backend
>>> of postfix to handle the mailq ?
>>
>> Please state the PROBLEM instead of the SOLUTION. Wietse
On 29/12/2010, at 8:29 AM, Joan Moreau
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 04:29:34PM -0500, Joan Moreau wrote:
>
> I am just looking for a MySQL bakcend to replace the hard-disk storage of
> the postfix mailqueue. This is not a problem, this is something I am
> looking for.
This is surely a "means" and not an "end". What real purpose would
stori
On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 at 22:29 CET,
Joan Moreau wrote:
> I am just looking for a MySQL bakcend to replace the hard-disk storage
> of the postfix mailqueue. This is not a problem, this is something I
> am looking for.
Judging by your initial message in this thread I'd say your proble
Well, no need to get angry.
I am just looking for a MySQL bakcend to replace the hard-disk storage
of
the postfix mailqueue. This is not a problem, this is something I am
looking for.
Best,
Joan
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 12:28:57 -0500 (EST), Wietse Venema wrote:
Joan Moreau:
Well, more clearl
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 12:19:23PM -0500, Joan Moreau wrote:
> Well, more clearly, my question is :
>
> How can I plug Mysql as a
> backend of postfix to handle the mailq ?
It was clear enough before. The answer is that this is not
possible. The queue is file-based by design.
The queue design
Joan Moreau:
> Well, more clearly, my question is :
>
> How can I plug Mysql as a
> backend of postfix to handle the mailq ?
Please state the PROBLEM instead of the SOLUTION.
Wietse
> On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 12:00:04
> -0500 (EST), Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Joan Moreau:
> >> Hi, the po
Well, more clearly, my question is :
How can I plug Mysql as a
backend of postfix to handle the mailq ?
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 12:00:04
-0500 (EST), Wietse Venema wrote:
> Joan Moreau:
>> Hi, the postfix
queue manager (qmgr) is taking far too much resources when the number of
email pending is
Joan Moreau:
> Hi,
>
> the postfix queue manager (qmgr) is taking far too much
> resources when the number of email pending is growing.
Sorry, you are jumping to conclusions.
There are many reasons why mail can pile up in the queue, and you
have not given a shred of information that allows peo
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 08:28:48AM -0500, Joan Moreau wrote:
> the postfix queue manager (qmgr) is taking far too much
> resources
What does "too much resources" mean? CPU? disk I/O? RAM?
> when the number of email pending is growing.
Treat the disease not the symptoms, why is the deferred que
We do have a web portal for users to s*bscribe or uns*bscribe
themselves. And each newsletter contains such a link in case users want
to uns*bscribe.
We already have a very big list which is filled with users who purchased
and s*bscribed in our web site. So there's no need to buy that from a
3rd p
Yaoxing put forth on 12/24/2010 9:20 AM:
> The list comes from our clients' subscriptions. However, we didn't
> verify the ownership of the emails before which maybe lead to invalid
> email addresses. This is what we can improve in future.
You should have already had a process in place for "list
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 11:38:19PM +0800, Yaoxing wrote:
> So I must scan the log for the list, isn't it? It works of course but is
> there any more specific way to do that? because scanning spends a lot of
> time, and you don't know where you stopped last time (or not easy to find
> out). espe
"Wietse Venema":
Yaoxing:
True but there got to be some easy way to export that list, otherwise
I'll have to delete the dead mails from our database manually from time
to time. Any ideas how I can get everything work fluently? I mean, for
example, every several days I get all dead mail address
So I must scan the log for the list, isn't it? It works of course but is
there any more specific way to do that? because scanning spends a lot of
time, and you don't know where you stopped last time (or not easy to
find out). especially our front end platform is based on .NET which does
not wor
Yaoxing:
> True but there got to be some easy way to export that list, otherwise
> I'll have to delete the dead mails from our database manually from time
> to time. Any ideas how I can get everything work fluently? I mean, for
> example, every several days I get all dead mail addresses from pos
Thanks for the suggestions. Some comments below.
Regards,
Yaoxing
2010/12/24 9:17, Victor Duchovni Wrote:
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 09:11:19AM +0800, ? wrote:
- Make sure your lists really contain users who want to receive the
newsletter, not just users whose email address you happene
True but there got to be some easy way to export that list, otherwise
I'll have to delete the dead mails from our database manually from time
to time. Any ideas how I can get everything work fluently? I mean, for
example, every several days I get all dead mail addresses from postfix
by maybe a
* Victor Duchovni :
> - Remove non-working addresses promptly from your lists.
This step alon considerably improves reputation AND delivery time.
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Campus Benjamin Franklin
Hindenburgdamm 30
-Original Message-
From: Yaoxing
Sent: 23/12/2010 10:37:58 pm
To: r...@netcore.co.in
Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: postfix queue tuning
> I think the bandwidths is OK. I have a 100Mb > ethernet but until now it's
> like15Mb/s according to
> iftop
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 09:11:19AM +0800, ? wrote:
> I cannot really understand based on what do u insist on I'm spamer? Ok
> I didn't obfusecate the clients email that's my fault. But why do u
> think I post only a few lines at first?
> Besides, I did not exit from the thread, removing am
I cannot really understand based on what do u insist on I'm spamer? Ok
I didn't obfusecate the clients email that's my fault. But why do u
think I post only a few lines at first?
Besides, I did not exit from the thread, removing amavis does resolve
my problem. And it's really too late for me if u e
Ralf Hildebrandt put forth on 12/23/2010 1:45 PM:
> * Wietse Venema :
>
>> I was getting suspicious because Yahoo is permanently refusing your
>> mail, but this is bad:
>>
>> % host 195.151.228.67.b.barracudacentral.org
>> 195.151.228.67.b.barracudacentral.org has address 127.0.0.2
>>
>> B
* Wietse Venema :
> I was getting suspicious because Yahoo is permanently refusing your
> mail, but this is bad:
>
> % host 195.151.228.67.b.barracudacentral.org
> 195.151.228.67.b.barracudacentral.org has address 127.0.0.2
>
> BTW your SMTP server banner says e.dealextreme.com.
It's al
* Victor Duchovni :
> It takes mail many days to get through the content filter. Fix your content
> filter.
Or circumvent it for this type of mail! If your KNOW what you're
sending out, why scan for viruses?
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitäts
Although the subscription page is always open to our clients, we don't
send newsletters until recently. That's why I suddenly get so many
subscribers, valid and invalid, all at a time, and get so many troubles
then. Otherwise I won't work until 3:00AM.
Anyway, we're too far away from the topic.
Well I don't want to make this thread look an advertisement. but as long
as you found out already, try Alexa to get more about dealextreme.com
which would prove to you we are not spammers.
Regards,
Yaoxing
2010/12/24 3:05, Wietse Venema Wrote:
Yaoxing:
I was getting suspicious because Yahoo
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 02:53:15AM +0800, Yaoxing wrote:
> My company is a ecommerce company which send newsletters to our subscribed
> clients weekly. we have nothing to do with spammers.
Sufficiently poor list management and/or privacy policies are
indistinguishable from spam. If you want to h
Yaoxing:
> No this is a misunderstanding. I just masked my company's domain name
> with xxx.com due to my policies. I used to mask it with abc.com but it
> seems to be a TV chanel. I don't want to confuse people so I changed to
> xxx.com, just randomly.
> My company is a ecommerce company which
No this is a misunderstanding. I just masked my company's domain name
with xxx.com due to my policies. I used to mask it with abc.com but it
seems to be a TV chanel. I don't want to confuse people so I changed to
xxx.com, just randomly.
My company is a ecommerce company which send newsletters to
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 01:51:13AM +0800, Yaoxing wrote:
> Dec 23 11:38:35 e postfix/qmgr[29972]: 6FC51297C081: from=,
> size=18380, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Some new mail is entering the active queue either from "incoming" or
"deferred" queue.
Do you really want the hostname "e" in t
Yaoxing put forth on 12/23/2010 12:05 PM:
> Then I think I didn't express it clearly. sorry for my bad English.
> I have like 400,000 subscribers. every week I send to all of them a news
> letter. Every 4 sec, I send out 1 mail to 1 person. I know it's very
> slow, but still it congests. That's why
Then I think I didn't express it clearly. sorry for my bad English.
I have like 400,000 subscribers. every week I send to all of them a news
letter. Every 4 sec, I send out 1 mail to 1 person. I know it's very
slow, but still it congests. That's why I'm wondering what's wrong. also
the same ser
Yaoxing put forth on 12/23/2010 11:29 AM:
> relay=127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10024
Why are you sending outbound newsletters through a content filter? You
should already know that the content is not spam, and virus free, yes?
And if they are newsletters, why are you sending them every 4 seconds to
the
Sorry, here's the full list with 100 lines:
Dec 23 11:38:35 e postfix/qmgr[29972]: 5E55BFC749F: removed
Dec 23 11:38:35 e postfix/qmgr[29972]: 6FC51297C081:
from=, size=18380, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Dec 23 11:38:38 e postfix/smtp[34263]: 4E4C7297BE10:
to=, relay=127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1]:10024, conn_
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 01:37:48AM +0800, Yaoxing wrote:
> There's nothing in my hold queue. MailScanner do you mean amavis? I stopped
> that 10 hours ago. but it doesn't seem to make the situation better.
You can't just "stop" the content filter, existing messages have the
content_filter transp
There's nothing in my hold queue. MailScanner do you mean amavis? I
stopped that 10 hours ago. but it doesn't seem to make the situation better.
If I restart postfix, does it make the figure like that? because I
noticed mails in active queues went back to incoming queue while
restarting. So mayb
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 01:29:00AM +0800, Yaoxing wrote:
>> Waste of time. Post NON-VERBOSE LOGGING by smtp(8) and qmgr(8).
>>
>> logfiles=/some/where
>> egrep 'postfix/(qmgr|smtp)\[' $logfiles | tail -100
>
> Dec 23 11:23:25 e postfix/qmgr[29972]: 3C15BFB9143: removed
> Dec 23 11:23:25
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 01:17:48AM +0800, Yaoxing wrote:
> It's a newsletter group. because it's congesting so I stopped posting new
> mails. I think that's why all mails are from 1280+ min ago.
No. This is wrong, the incoming queue contains fairly fresh mail.
> I use
> find active/ | wc -l
> w
see comments below.
2010/12/24 1:16, Victor Duchovni Wrote:
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 01:07:58AM +0800, Yaoxing wrote:
Waste of time. Post NON-VERBOSE LOGGING by smtp(8) and qmgr(8).
logfiles=/some/where
egrep 'postfix/(qmgr|smtp)\[' $logfiles | tail -100
Dec 23 11:23:25 e postfi
It's a newsletter group. because it's congesting so I stopped posting
new mails. I think that's why all mails are from 1280+ min ago.
I use
find active/ | wc -l
which gives me 20,002, while
find incoming/ | wc -l
gives 130,000+
and the incoming queue is slowly decreasing.
Regards,
Yaoxing
2010
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 01:07:58AM +0800, Yaoxing wrote:
> I think the bandwidths is OK. I have a 100Mb ethernet but until now it's
> like15Mb/s according to
> iftop -i eth1
> For the concurrency issue, what parameter would you suggest to change? I
> found some parameters from the documents but
12/24 0:54, Ramprasad A Padmanabhan Wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Yaoxing
Sent: 23/12/2010 4:23:51 pm
To: Ramprasad
Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: postfix queue tuning
Hi Ram,
I do have some more spare memory, but I'm afraid it doesn't resolve my
problem.
Let&#
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 07:03:45PM +0800, Yaoxing wrote:
> qshape active
>
> T 5 10 20 40 80 160 320 640 1280 1280+
> TOTAL 1000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 1000
> gmail.com 254 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 254
>
-Original Message-
From: Yaoxing
Sent: 23/12/2010 4:23:51 pm
To: Ramprasad
Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: postfix queue tuning
Hi Ram,
I do have some more spare memory, but I'm afraid it doesn't resolve my
problem.
Let's say, my active queue is filled wi
Yaoxing:
> @Stan
> It's OK, you helped a lot already. And your figure is a very good
> reference for me. Thank you very much.
>
> @Wietse
> I'll try not to use relay host to check the speed.
> And sorry if I didn't express myself clearly, I don't mean to complain
> anything. Just don't know what
@Stan
It's OK, you helped a lot already. And your figure is a very good
reference for me. Thank you very much.
@Wietse
I'll try not to use relay host to check the speed.
And sorry if I didn't express myself clearly, I don't mean to complain
anything. Just don't know what's wrong and what to do
Wietse Venema put forth on 12/23/2010 6:10 AM:
>> 4. Less than 20 postfix process (while limitation is explicitly set to 100)
>
> Then, you are sending all mail through the same relay host. Why
> are you sending mass mail through a relay host?
>
> Wietse
It would appear my recommendation m
Yaoxing put forth on 12/23/2010 4:45 AM:
> Is this what you're talking about?
Yes.
> Device: tps Blk_read/s Blk_wrtn/s Blk_read Blk_wrtn
> sda 148.63 27.55 6550.60 523033469 124353201092
> sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 2524 116
> sda2 148.63 27.55 6550.59 523027626 124353101816
> sda3 0.00 0.00 0.01 2895
Yaoxing Zhang:
> No special reasons, just trying to find a simple way to program. If this is
> the reason why it's so slow, how about using smtp instead? does it resolve
> the problem?
Please go back to the default settings, and report if the
system is still behaving slower than expected.
It is s
No special reasons, just trying to find a simple way to program. If this is
the reason why it's so slow, how about using smtp instead? does it resolve
the problem?
On Dec 23, 2010 8:11 PM, "Wietse Venema" wrote:
> 4. Less than 20 postfix process (while limitation is explicitly set to 100)
Then, you are sending all mail through the same relay host. Why
are you sending mass mail through a relay host?
Wietse
Post the output from postconf -n, and a relevant section of the mail logs.
--
J.
It takes too long to show the complete result, but here's the first
screen of
qshape active
T 5 10 20 40 80 160 320 640
1280 1280+
TOTAL 1000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 1000
gmail.com 25
* Yaoxing :
> Hi all,
> I'm looking for some help of postfix server configuration. hope this is
> the right place to ask.
> I have a mail server running iRedMail (which is based on postfix). It
> sends mails to our subscribers every 4s. I think this doesn't seem to be
> a very heavy load. however,
Hi Ram,
I do have some more spare memory, but I'm afraid it doesn't resolve my
problem.
Let's say, my active queue is filled with 20,000 mails, but mails are
not going out but remains in memory. In this case if I increase active
queue size, I just put more mails in memory, they still don't go o
Hi Stan,
Thank you very much for your adequate explanation. I made some comments
below.
Regards,
Yaoxing
2010/12/23 16:06, Stan Hoeppner:
> Yaoxing put forth on 12/22/2010 9:59 PM:
>
>> 3. 3.2MB/s disk IO write, 0.01MB/s read.
> MB/s throughput isn't usually a factor, but IOPS definitely can be.
On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 11:59 +0800, Yaoxing wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm looking for some help of postfix server configuration. hope this is
> the right place to ask.
> I have a mail server running iRedMail (which is based on postfix). It
> sends mails to our subscribers every 4s. I think this doesn't see
Yaoxing put forth on 12/22/2010 9:59 PM:
> 3. 3.2MB/s disk IO write, 0.01MB/s read.
MB/s throughput isn't usually a factor, but IOPS definitely can be.
What's in the iostat tps column for the device your mail queues reside on?
If your mail queue resides on a single mechanical disk spindle you ma
Am 23.12.2010 04:59, schrieb Yaoxing:
> Hi all,
> I'm looking for some help of postfix server configuration. hope this is
> the right place to ask.
> I have a mail server running iRedMail (which is based on postfix). It
> sends mails to our subscribers every 4s. I think this doesn't seem to be
> a
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 04:50 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Patrick Ben Koetter put forth on 7/22/2010 2:11 AM:
> > * Stan Hoeppner :
> >> Wietse Venema put forth on 7/21/2010 2:22 PM:
> >>> Ram:
> One server of ours just accepts the mails from clients and then relays
> the mails to other s
Patrick Ben Koetter put forth on 7/22/2010 2:11 AM:
> * Stan Hoeppner :
>> Wietse Venema put forth on 7/21/2010 2:22 PM:
>>> Ram:
One server of ours just accepts the mails from clients and then relays
the mails to other servers.
Since there is almost no mail queued on the server , I
* Stan Hoeppner :
> Wietse Venema put forth on 7/21/2010 2:22 PM:
> > Ram:
> >> One server of ours just accepts the mails from clients and then relays
> >> the mails to other servers.
> >> Since there is almost no mail queued on the server , I think it is will
> >> be good to mount /var/spool/post
Wietse Venema put forth on 7/21/2010 2:22 PM:
> Ram:
>> One server of ours just accepts the mails from clients and then relays
>> the mails to other servers.
>> Since there is almost no mail queued on the server , I think it is will
>> be good to mount /var/spool/postfix on a tmpfs partition.
>
Ram:
> One server of ours just accepts the mails from clients and then relays
> the mails to other servers.
> Since there is almost no mail queued on the server , I think it is will
> be good to mount /var/spool/postfix on a tmpfs partition.
You will lose all mail in the queue when the system cr
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 06:39:07AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > One server of ours just accepts the mails from clients and then relays
> > the mails to other servers.
> > Since there is almost no mail queued on the server , I think it is will
> > be good to mount /var/spool/postfix on a tmpfs
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
