Re: performance tuning - relay

2010-06-28 Thread Daniel V. Reinhardt
- Original Message > From: Daniel V. Reinhardt > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Sent: Mon, June 28, 2010 3:32:04 AM > Subject: Re: performance tuning - relay > > - Original Message > From: Stan Hoeppner < > ymailto="mailto:s...@hardw

Re: performance tuning - relay

2010-06-28 Thread Daniel V. Reinhardt
- Original Message > From: Stan Hoeppner > To: postfix-users@postfix.org > Sent: Mon, June 28, 2010 2:23:15 AM > Subject: Re: performance tuning - relay > > Christian Purnomo put forth on 6/27/2010 5:50 PM: > From your > questions above, I could see where yo

Re: performance tuning - relay

2010-06-27 Thread Christian Purnomo
Hi Stan Subject: Re: performance tuning - relay Date: Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 01:23:15AM -0500 Quoting Stan Hoeppner (s...@hardwarefreak.com): : What piqued my curiosity is why the queue on server2 starting growing, and : rather large at that, _after_ you got the Postfix bottleneck straightened out

Re: performance tuning - relay

2010-06-27 Thread Stan Hoeppner
Christian Purnomo put forth on 6/27/2010 5:50 PM: > From your questions above, I could see where you're coming from that if > Server2 has performance problem then it would make sense to see the > queue built up at Server1. I can confirm server2 is very underload at > any time, the server is overs

Re: performance tuning - relay

2010-06-27 Thread Christian Purnomo
Subject: Re: performance tuning - relay Date: Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 06:21:01PM -0500 Quoting Stan Hoeppner (s...@hardwarefreak.com): : Can you provide some more specs on server2? IIRC you said you had a multidisk : RAID array on serv2. What RAID level and how many disks? What filesystem

Re: performance tuning - relay

2010-06-25 Thread Stan Hoeppner
Christian Purnomo put forth on 6/25/2010 8:01 AM: > With the settings above, the queue is now down to 2442 within 20 > minutes. It was at 21,000 mark when I sent my first email below > (nearly 12 hours ago), so the progress has been very minimal until the > change above. The bottleneck has now

Re: performance tuning - relay

2010-06-25 Thread Victor Duchovni
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 01:53:46AM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > Christian Purnomo put forth on 6/24/2010 11:33 PM: > > > /etc/postfix/transport: > > server2.com:relay:[10.0.2.73] > > > > /etc/postfix/master.cf: > > relay unix - - n - 200 smtp > >

Re: performance tuning - relay

2010-06-25 Thread Christian Purnomo
- the settings above are based from reading TUNING_README.html, it's trial and error. CP Subject: Re: performance tuning - relay Date: Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 01:53:46AM -0500 Quoting Stan Hoeppner (s...@hardwarefreak.com): : Christian Purnomo put forth on 6/24/2010 11:33 PM: : : &

Re: performance tuning - relay

2010-06-24 Thread Stan Hoeppner
Christian Purnomo put forth on 6/24/2010 11:33 PM: > /etc/postfix/transport: > server2.com: relay:[10.0.2.73] > > /etc/postfix/master.cf: > relay unix - - n - 200 smtp > -o smtp_helo_timeout=3s > -o smtp_connect_timeout=3s > -o disable_dn

performance tuning - relay

2010-06-24 Thread Christian Purnomo
Hi We have 2 postfix servers. 1. One is our mail gateway which is also the primary MX for our domains, inbound and outbound emails all passes this (let's call this server1) server. 2. The other server is a standalone postfix with tons of disk. (let's call this server2). Server 2 doesn't rel