I just wonder if anyone have tested Trend Micro for AV. I know it's a pay AV but just wonder..
Thanks Nick Bright wrote: > I had the same problems under high load on a similarly configured > machine (2.0Ghz instead of 2.4Ghz, but other than that about the same). > > When I installed the external & big todo patches it helped A LOT, but I > still have some delay in delivery. However it is much more "acceptable" > as messages can be delayed one to two minutes, instead of fifteen to > twenty minutes. Usually things go through fairly instantly. > > The single best performance enhancer you could do would be the external > todo patch, from my point of view. > > I also found that the chkuser patch also helped a LOT, I highly > recommend using that patch as well. > > For reference, I'm not using Bill's toaster, but rather my own custom brew. > > Another load reducing method is to use a much faster anti-spam product, > but you will most likely have to pay for that. I suggest MPPd > (messagepartners.com) I've been using it for several years with the > Cloudmark plugin and it is much more effective than spamassassin, with > hundreds of times lower load on the system. > > --- > - Nick Bright > Network Administrator > Terra World > Tel 888-332-1616 x 315 > Fax 620-332-1201 > > > João Luiz - Terra wrote: >> Hi Tren, >> >> Sorry. My english is not good :). >> >> My server is dual xeon 2.4 with 2 Gb RAM and HD SCSI 73 Gb. >> I have problems with delivery delay when my server is with many >> connections POP3 and SMTP. >> I use isoqlog to analyze my email traffic, but I don´t have stats of >> POP3 and connections with my SMTP (RBL, no delivery, ...). Exists any >> software to analyze POP3 and SMTP log? >> When my server is slow, I have: >> SMTP concurrent: 40 - 50 >> POP3 concurrent: 20 - 30 >> Load Average: 30 - 40 >> >> I have many SMTP connections with "not existing recipient". >> >> My server was very good. Between last monday and last friday it is >> very slow. >> How can I identify a possible attack? >> >> Thank you >> Joao >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tren Blackburn" >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: <vchkpw@inter7.com> >> Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 8:02 PM >> Subject: RE: [vchkpw] qmail high performance >> >> >> Hi Joao; >> >>> From: João Luiz - Terra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 3:22 PM >>> To: vchkpw@inter7.com >>> Subject: [vchkpw] qmail high performance >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I am working with qmail toaster by http://www.shupp.org/toaster/. >>> Is it the better performance instalation? >>> >>> My server is very slowly :( >> >> You'll need to give something specific here. Bill Shupps Toaster is >> widely popular. I use it myself and have no issues with performance. >> What are the specifications of the hardware you've implemented it on. >> What specifically is performing slow? Is there anything else on this >> server? Approximately how many mailboxes are housed on this server? >> How many deliveries per second/minute/hour/day (whatever is easiest to >> convey) and do you have any idea what your peak concurrent deliveries >> are? You need to provide as much information as possible before >> asking such a general question. >> >> Regards, >> >> Tren >> >> >> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra. >> Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 05/10/2007 / Versão: >> 5.1.00/5135 >> Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/ >> >> > > > !DSPAM:470a8edd117907257416469!
