Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: exim: users

Bulk Outbound Performance

 

 

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All exim users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


exim.ml at riotm

Sep 2, 2012, 2:40 AM

Post #1 of 36 (1268 views)
Permalink
Bulk Outbound Performance

Good morning,

More to satisfy my own curiosity than anything else, I'm wondering about
the performance that could be squeezed out of Exim in a bulk mailing
capacity.

I have a client that currently uses and ESP who have an astounding
throughput of up to a million messages per hour. This brought up a
discussion about high-performance MTAs and tuning and the general
comments I'm hearing are that things like Exim, Sendmail & Postfix are
just not man enough for such a task and the absolute best you could
expect from any of them is about 100k messages per hour.

Now, I like to wipe out the fact from fiction because people like
PowerMTA are looking to sell their products and it would be in their
interest to neglect that any MTA (Exim/Sendmail/Postfix) could be set up
in a way that would easily rival their product.

Can anyone on the list tell me if it's possible to performance tune Exim
to a point where it could complete with this and possible strategies?

Kind thanks
Ron




--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


andrej at antiszoc

Sep 2, 2012, 5:43 AM

Post #2 of 36 (1243 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 10:40:12 +0100, Ron White wrote:
> Good morning,
>
> More to satisfy my own curiosity than anything else, I'm wondering
> about
> the performance that could be squeezed out of Exim in a bulk mailing
> capacity.
>
> I have a client that currently uses and ESP who have an astounding
> throughput of up to a million messages per hour. This brought up a
> discussion about high-performance MTAs and tuning and the general
> comments I'm hearing are that things like Exim, Sendmail & Postfix
> are
> just not man enough for such a task and the absolute best you could
> expect from any of them is about 100k messages per hour.
>
> Now, I like to wipe out the fact from fiction because people like
> PowerMTA are looking to sell their products and it would be in their
> interest to neglect that any MTA (Exim/Sendmail/Postfix) could be set
> up
> in a way that would easily rival their product.
>
> Can anyone on the list tell me if it's possible to performance tune
> Exim
> to a point where it could complete with this and possible strategies?
>
> Kind thanks
> Ron

Hi,

The bottleneck is usually the remote party which will ban your address
temporarly if you send huge amount of mails from one address. At that
number of messages even network latency and bandwidth will come into the
picture. It's also a question that what's the target message (full size)
that should be delivered? My last question is that what 'thruoghput'
means? Does it mean completed deliveries or that they simply accepted
the mail and they're sitting in the queue?

So I think it's not a matter of MTA fine tuning, but a complete tuning
of the OS (and hardware) that runs the MTA and the MTA itself of course.
For example putting the mailq onto an SSD or into memory might give
quite a boost to any MTA. :)

Regards,
Andras

--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim.ml at riotm

Sep 2, 2012, 7:06 AM

Post #3 of 36 (1247 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

On Sun, 2012-09-02 at 14:43 +0200, Gót András wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Sep 2012 10:40:12 +0100, Ron White wrote:
> > Good morning,
> >
> > More to satisfy my own curiosity than anything else, I'm wondering
> > about
> > the performance that could be squeezed out of Exim in a bulk mailing
> > capacity.
> >
> > I have a client that currently uses and ESP who have an astounding
> > throughput of up to a million messages per hour. This brought up a
> > discussion about high-performance MTAs and tuning and the general
> > comments I'm hearing are that things like Exim, Sendmail & Postfix
> > are
> > just not man enough for such a task and the absolute best you could
> > expect from any of them is about 100k messages per hour.
> >
> > Now, I like to wipe out the fact from fiction because people like
> > PowerMTA are looking to sell their products and it would be in their
> > interest to neglect that any MTA (Exim/Sendmail/Postfix) could be set
> > up
> > in a way that would easily rival their product.
> >
> > Can anyone on the list tell me if it's possible to performance tune
> > Exim
> > to a point where it could complete with this and possible strategies?
> >
> > Kind thanks
> > Ron
>
> Hi,
>
> The bottleneck is usually the remote party which will ban your address
> temporarly if you send huge amount of mails from one address. At that
> number of messages even network latency and bandwidth will come into the
> picture. It's also a question that what's the target message (full size)
> that should be delivered? My last question is that what 'thruoghput'
> means? Does it mean completed deliveries or that they simply accepted
> the mail and they're sitting in the queue?
>
> So I think it's not a matter of MTA fine tuning, but a complete tuning
> of the OS (and hardware) that runs the MTA and the MTA itself of course.
> For example putting the mailq onto an SSD or into memory might give
> quite a boost to any MTA. :)
>
> Regards,
> Andras

Thanks for the follow up Andras.

Agree that it's not just the MTA, there is lots more going on.

What I'm looking to do - taking out the other factors like network
speed, recipient rejection etc - is to establish if Exim can compete
with the so-called wonder MTA's like PowerMTA.

Exim is my preferred MTA and I love it, I'd just like to be able to
stick a couple of fingers up at the doubters and say 'yes, it can
compete with that.'




--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim-users at lists

Sep 2, 2012, 7:39 AM

Post #4 of 36 (1245 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 02/09/12 15:06, Ron White wrote:

> What I'm looking to do - taking out the other factors like network
> speed, recipient rejection etc - is to establish if Exim can
> compete with the so-called wonder MTA's like PowerMTA.
>
> Exim is my preferred MTA and I love it, I'd just like to be able
> to stick a couple of fingers up at the doubters and say 'yes, it
> can compete with that.'

I don't know anything about PowerMTA, but I know that you could get
considerably higher performance than Exim from different
architectures. Exim has one process spawned per concurrent delivery
attempt. This is kind of like Apaches pre-fork mpm where there is one
process per concurrent HTTP response. An MTA which uses an event model
based on something like epoll, depending on the OS, could perform much
better.

- --
Mike Cardwell https://grepular.com/ http://cardwellit.com/
OpenPGP Key 35BC AF1D 3AA2 1F84 3DC3 B0CF 70A5 F512 0018 461F
XMPP OTR Key 8924 B06A 7917 AAF3 DBB1 BF1B 295C 3C78 3EF1 46B4
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=7+sL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim-users-9259 at lists

Sep 2, 2012, 1:32 PM

Post #5 of 36 (1244 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 10:40:12AM +0100, Ron White wrote:
> I have a client that currently uses and ESP who have an astounding
> throughput of up to a million messages per hour. This brought up a
> discussion about high-performance MTAs and tuning and the general
> comments I'm hearing are that things like Exim, Sendmail & Postfix are
> just not man enough for such a task and the absolute best you could
> expect from any of them is about 100k messages per hour.

Well, an Email Service Provider could very well have ten or more
servers! If I were earning money for getting mail out quickly,
putting more servers on the job would definitely be a high
priority!

On the other hand, it does stand to reason that any
general-purpose mailer can be surpassed by an equally
well-written program designed to deliver a single message to
a pre-compiled list of addresses, just ticking off successful
deliveries.

--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim-users-9259 at lists

Sep 2, 2012, 1:47 PM

Post #6 of 36 (1246 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

The exact same question was sent by someone calling himself "Sam
Jones" to the postfix mailing list at almost exactly the same
time. Peddling one's services by soliciting comparisons with
competitors is so passé . . .

--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim at u61

Sep 2, 2012, 2:01 PM

Post #7 of 36 (1254 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

On Sun, 2012-09-02 at 22:47 +0200, Lorens Kockum wrote:
> The exact same question was sent by someone calling himself "Sam
> Jones" to the postfix mailing list at almost exactly the same
> time. Peddling one's services by soliciting comparisons with
> competitors is so passé . . .

Mr Raeburn alias Ron White <exim.ml [at] riotm> does not appear to be a
conventional EXIM user. His mail servers respond with:-

Connected to my.riotm.co.uk (212.69.52.154).
Escape character is '^]'.
220 Helo pleased to meet you

Connected to mx.riotm.co.uk (212.69.52.155).
Escape character is '^]'.
220 barracuda.ducktest.co.uk ESMTP (fee8cf778d5bba063e7d97c502de702e)


--
Paul.
England,
EU.



--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


wbh at conducive

Sep 2, 2012, 2:13 PM

Post #8 of 36 (1245 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

Always Learning wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2012-09-02 at 22:47 +0200, Lorens Kockum wrote:
>> The exact same question was sent by someone calling himself "Sam
>> Jones" to the postfix mailing list at almost exactly the same
>> time. Peddling one's services by soliciting comparisons with
>> competitors is so passé . . .
>
> Mr Raeburn alias Ron White <exim.ml [at] riotm> does not appear to be a
> conventional EXIM user. His mail servers respond with:-
>
> Connected to my.riotm.co.uk (212.69.52.154).
> Escape character is '^]'.
> 220 Helo pleased to meet you
>
> Connected to mx.riotm.co.uk (212.69.52.155).
> Escape character is '^]'.
> 220 barracuda.ducktest.co.uk ESMTP (fee8cf778d5bba063e7d97c502de702e)
>
>

Thanks for that, Paul

====

echo '*riotm.co.uk' >> /var/filters/REGEXP-block

====

Too many 'Merchant Bankers' among the free range rude as it is....

Bill
--
韓家標


--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


wbh at conducive

Sep 2, 2012, 2:14 PM

Post #9 of 36 (1248 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

Lorens Kockum wrote:
> The exact same question was sent by someone calling himself "Sam
> Jones" to the postfix mailing list at almost exactly the same
> time. Peddling one's services by soliciting comparisons with
> competitors is so passé . . .
>

Sure hope he convinces more of the parasite-classes to use PowerMTA,
then if that is his goal:

====

deny regex = ^Received:: .*PowerMTA

====

Bill
---
韓家標


--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


dlugo at etherboy

Sep 2, 2012, 2:49 PM

Post #10 of 36 (1244 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

On Sun, 2 Sep 2012, W B Hacker wrote:
>
> Lorens Kockum wrote:
>> The exact same question was sent by someone calling himself "Sam
>> Jones" to the postfix mailing list at almost exactly the same
>> time. Peddling one's services by soliciting comparisons with
>> competitors is so pass? . . .
>>
>
> Sure hope he convinces more of the parasite-classes to use PowerMTA, then if
> that is his goal:
>
> ====
>
> deny regex = ^Received:: .*PowerMTA
>


Yeah, why would you want to receive mail from any of:

angieslist
papajohns
thinkgeek
bankofamerica
hulu
newegg
bmwusa
allstate
expedia

I guess if you're not in NA, a lot of those don't matter to your users.

I'm just sayin'...


--
--------------------------------------------------------
Dave Lugo dlugo [at] etherboy No spam, thanks.
Are you the police? . . . No ma'am, we're sysadmins.
--------------------------------------------------------

--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


wbh at conducive

Sep 2, 2012, 3:06 PM

Post #11 of 36 (1247 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

Dave Lugo wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Sep 2012, W B Hacker wrote:
>>
>> Lorens Kockum wrote:
>>> The exact same question was sent by someone calling himself "Sam
>>> Jones" to the postfix mailing list at almost exactly the same
>>> time. Peddling one's services by soliciting comparisons with
>>> competitors is so pass? . . .
>>>
>>
>> Sure hope he convinces more of the parasite-classes to use PowerMTA,
>> then if that is his goal:
>>
>> ====
>>
>> deny regex = ^Received:: .*PowerMTA
>>
>
>
> Yeah, why would you want to receive mail from any of:
>
> angieslist
> papajohns
> thinkgeek
> bankofamerica
> hulu
> newegg
> bmwusa
> allstate
> expedia
>
> I guess if you're not in NA, a lot of those don't matter to your users.
>
> I'm just sayin'...
>
>

That is not a problem atall.

BofA customer since '75. Add several US utility firms, incuding my own
'lectric company and Verizon ('til they cut their own FiOS one time
too-many and got booted). Add also airlines, rental cars, travel
agencies, and several other 'Fortune 400' I use now and then to the list.

Not a sirpise to discover that most do NOT use PowerMTA for direct
customer communication - only for spamvertising.

They aren't entirely stoopid.

NONE are affected wherein billing is left 'dead-tree' and balances,
payments, or bookings managed online

NONE are affected when the 'secure online' messaging centers are used.
As they usually must be, anyway.

End of the day, hard-blocking PowerMTA spew is still a low/no hassle
plus. It has not even required offsetting White Listing. Which, after
all, is dead-easy, and would have skipped that acl clause and many more.

A very LARGE plus, blocking PowerMTA is, as it smacks the multiple
legions of entirely unrelated Merchant Bankers that are NOT 'desired'
correspondents. It isn't as if that MTA had any other purpose but
high-volume spew, after all.

I may be lazy. Consumately so.

But I 'laze' on the side of the time-efficiency of my user-community,
not being swamped by spam out of 'you can't DO that' helplessness.

Bill
---
韓家標


--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim at u61

Sep 2, 2012, 3:36 PM

Post #12 of 36 (1251 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

On Sun, 2012-09-02 at 21:14 +0000, W B Hacker wrote:

> Lorens Kockum wrote:
> > The exact same question was sent by someone calling himself "Sam
> > Jones" to the postfix mailing list at almost exactly the same
> > time. Peddling one's services by soliciting comparisons with
> > competitors is so passé . . .
> >

> Sure hope he convinces more of the parasite-classes to use PowerMTA,
> then if that is his goal:

The person appears to run www.spampig.co.uk which declares

"We are a mail & web filtering/proxying service based in the UK."

More off-list.


Paul.
England, Europe.




--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


dlugo at etherboy

Sep 2, 2012, 5:14 PM

Post #13 of 36 (1244 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

On Sun, 2 Sep 2012, W B Hacker wrote:
--snip--
>
> End of the day, hard-blocking PowerMTA spew is still a low/no hassle plus. It
> has not even required offsetting White Listing. Which, after all, is
> dead-easy, and would have skipped that acl clause and many more.
>
> A very LARGE plus, blocking PowerMTA is, as it smacks the multiple legions of
> entirely unrelated Merchant Bankers that are NOT 'desired' correspondents. It
> isn't as if that MTA had any other purpose but high-volume spew, after all.
>

I have not considered any of the mail I've mentioned to be spam. I've
signed up for it, and in some cases, paid for it.


> I may be lazy. Consumately so.
>

No comment.


> But I 'laze' on the side of the time-efficiency of my user-community, not
> being swamped by spam out of 'you can't DO that' helplessness.
>

If I was a member of your user community, I'd be a bit upset at some of
the spam filtering decisions you're making for me. Your mileage does
vary, apparently.


--
--------------------------------------------------------
Dave Lugo dlugo [at] etherboy No spam, thanks.
Are you the police? . . . No ma'am, we're sysadmins.
--------------------------------------------------------

--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


wbh at conducive

Sep 2, 2012, 6:04 PM

Post #14 of 36 (1246 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

Dave Lugo wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Sep 2012, W B Hacker wrote:
> --snip--

> If I was a member of your user community, I'd be a bit upset at some of
> the spam filtering decisions you're making for me. Your mileage does
> vary, apparently.
>
>

Business system, so the problem would never have arisen.

Most 'users' kept gmail accounts et al for their
personal/non-business/social use.

Most of that seems to be moving-off to hand-helds the past several
years. SMTP as we knew it won't vanish, but it is being progressively
maginalized a bit more each such go.

Bill
--
韓家標


--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim.ml at riotm

Sep 3, 2012, 10:34 AM

Post #15 of 36 (1217 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

On Sun, 2012-09-02 at 23:36 +0100, Always Learning wrote:

> The person appears to run www.spampig.co.uk which declares
>
> "We are a mail & web filtering/proxying service based in the UK."
>
> More off-list.
>
>
> Paul.
> England, Europe.

That's correct, I work with them - yes. I don't see how any of this is
relevant to my question. I did, indeed, ask the same question on the
Postfix list and I use an alias there as it is utterly aggressive and
rude most of the time, something this list has hardly ever suffered.

My question was simple - I was attempting to disprove claims that Exim
(and Postfix - I mentioned it in my post here and on the Postfix list)
was somehow inferior to PowerMTA.

When people jump to conclusions and start making assumptions, one and
one quickly become three.

Dear oh dear.




--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim-users at spodhuis

Sep 3, 2012, 9:53 PM

Post #16 of 36 (1217 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

On 2012-09-02 at 10:40 +0100, Ron White wrote:
> Can anyone on the list tell me if it's possible to performance tune Exim
> to a point where it could complete with this and possible strategies?

You don't mention the number of machines used.

It would require C language level changes to Exim, or some complex
configuration, to change from the current spool model to something which
manages destination queues and shuffles mail between them.

I could do it as a configuration-only thing, and with documentation it
would be maintainable, but I'd use it as an opportunity to study what
was needed and find ways to move it into the core to be more easily
configured as a stock option and reduce the technical debt of the
configuration maintenance.

Exim's not geared, as is, for large backlogs. With enough grunt, you
can overcome that, but it won't be as capable as a major email-pushing
engine.

Note that Exim's bias is towards stability; the
one-process-per-connection model (both inbound and outbound) means that
one weird remote site can't screw up other deliveries. If you have an
MTA which never does TLS, doesn't worry about inbound connections except
enough to handle callout verifications, and where the volumes are enough
that a few connections dying at once is statistical noise, you can swing
the bias to optimise for outbound throughput instead.

I think it's PowerMTA that I looked at back in January or so, and if
I'm remembering the right product, it's got support for web-bugs and
other tricks to try to get status feedback from HTML-enabled
mail-clients, to try to gather deliverability statistics, and it's all
tied into some nice dashboards. If a marketing department is looking at
this, you've got a bunch of work to do to compete. The MTA I looked at
was quite nice, at a technical level; it took to heart the C10k lessons
and, from the paper blurb, gave my cynical side pause enough to be
willing to take a serious look. That doesn't mean I ever want a job
_running_ a closed source MTA. *shudder* Being a postmaster has enough
problems already, without having a product you can't investigate and fix
yourself, when you're talking to so many different products at remote
sites. MTAs are one product that _seriously_ benefit from having the
source. But that's my bias. And hey, I ended up becoming an MTA
maintainer as a result.

Most open source folks don't send high volumes of identical mails, so
there hasn't been the push to develop an open competitor, so the
closed-source side has more options here.

-Phil

--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim.ml at riotm

Sep 4, 2012, 1:05 AM

Post #17 of 36 (1224 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 00:53 -0400, Phil Pennock wrote:
> On 2012-09-02 at 10:40 +0100, Ron White wrote:
> > Can anyone on the list tell me if it's possible to performance tune Exim
> > to a point where it could complete with this and possible strategies?
>
> You don't mention the number of machines used.
>
> It would require C language level changes to Exim, or some complex
> configuration, to change from the current spool model to something which
> manages destination queues and shuffles mail between them.
>
> I could do it as a configuration-only thing, and with documentation it
> would be maintainable, but I'd use it as an opportunity to study what
> was needed and find ways to move it into the core to be more easily
> configured as a stock option and reduce the technical debt of the
> configuration maintenance.
>
> Exim's not geared, as is, for large backlogs. With enough grunt, you
> can overcome that, but it won't be as capable as a major email-pushing
> engine.
>
> Note that Exim's bias is towards stability; the
> one-process-per-connection model (both inbound and outbound) means that
> one weird remote site can't screw up other deliveries. If you have an
> MTA which never does TLS, doesn't worry about inbound connections except
> enough to handle callout verifications, and where the volumes are enough
> that a few connections dying at once is statistical noise, you can swing
> the bias to optimise for outbound throughput instead.
>
> I think it's PowerMTA that I looked at back in January or so, and if
> I'm remembering the right product, it's got support for web-bugs and
> other tricks to try to get status feedback from HTML-enabled
> mail-clients, to try to gather deliverability statistics, and it's all
> tied into some nice dashboards. If a marketing department is looking at
> this, you've got a bunch of work to do to compete. The MTA I looked at
> was quite nice, at a technical level; it took to heart the C10k lessons
> and, from the paper blurb, gave my cynical side pause enough to be
> willing to take a serious look. That doesn't mean I ever want a job
> _running_ a closed source MTA. *shudder* Being a postmaster has enough
> problems already, without having a product you can't investigate and fix
> yourself, when you're talking to so many different products at remote
> sites. MTAs are one product that _seriously_ benefit from having the
> source. But that's my bias. And hey, I ended up becoming an MTA
> maintainer as a result.
>
> Most open source folks don't send high volumes of identical mails, so
> there hasn't been the push to develop an open competitor, so the
> closed-source side has more options here.
>
> -Phil
>
Thanks Phil,

I agree that Exim is not specifically designed to do the same job as
something like PowerMTA - and I'm very happy with my Exim(s) doing what
they do. Curiosity and general discussion with a large newsletter mailer
brought the question up for me, and I just thought I would ask it on a
trusted list.

It seems by doing this I've caused some kind of offence to some - which
totally perplexes me!

I don't think there is a huge OS need for an MTA that can maximize
delivery. Qmail appears to be configurable to offer similar performance
to PowerMTA, but it's not something I have a need to do. I just find the
subject interesting.

Thanks again for the great response. It's really appreciated.



--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim-users at lists

Sep 4, 2012, 1:36 AM

Post #18 of 36 (1216 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 04/09/12 09:05, Ron White wrote:

> It seems by doing this I've caused some kind of offence to some -
> which totally perplexes me!

I don't know why it perplexes you. You were caught out hiding your
identity and not declaring your self interest. It looks like you were
trying to promote PowerMTA in a deceitful manner. I've no idea if you
were or weren't, but it's not perplexing at all why some people may
have come to this conclusion.

- --
Mike Cardwell https://grepular.com/ http://cardwellit.com/
OpenPGP Key 35BC AF1D 3AA2 1F84 3DC3 B0CF 70A5 F512 0018 461F
XMPP OTR Key 8924 B06A 7917 AAF3 DBB1 BF1B 295C 3C78 3EF1 46B4
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=T8u5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


cyborg2 at benderirc

Sep 4, 2012, 2:31 AM

Post #19 of 36 (1220 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

Am 04.09.2012 06:53, schrieb Phil Pennock:
> Exim's not geared, as is, for large backlogs. With enough grunt, you
> can overcome that, but it won't be as capable as a major email-pushing
> engine.
>

And you only need that for spamming ( legal or illegal ). I.e. my last
multidomain server park handelt 500k mails I/O a day
per server with exim and it was enough. And i don't know how many we
blocked per day , but it was massive :)

So, no need for powerWSE .

Greetings Marius.

--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim-users at lists

Sep 4, 2012, 6:27 AM

Post #20 of 36 (1207 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 04/09/12 14:08, Ron White wrote:

>>> It seems by doing this I've caused some kind of offence to some
>>> - which totally perplexes me!
>>
>> I don't know why it perplexes you. You were caught out hiding
>> your identity and not declaring your self interest
>
> Rubbish. I have no interest in PowerMTA at all, other than it's
> claims to be 'better' in some way than FOOS - which *I* don't
> believe it is.
>
> You seem to have gotten excited because I asked to mailing lists
> that specialise in MTAs for an opinion and used an alias in one of
> them. Seriously? This is the Internet!

I didn't get excited at all. My first email in this thread answered
your question directly. My second email in this thread addressed your
confusion about how anybody could have mistaken your email to be a
marketing trick.

> You are welcome to think of me what you like. In so doing though,
> you've immediately missed the point and marked yourself out as a
> bit of a troll, if you don't mind me pointing it out. Dear oh
> dear.

Troll? I'm just going to leave links to the two emails I sent in this
thread right here for you to review:

https://lists.exim.org/lurker/message/20120902.143937.f28914d5.en.html
https://lists.exim.org/lurker/message/20120904.083602.59c8b063.en.html

Have I wasted my time trying to help you? If so, please let me know
and I'll kill-file you so as not to make that mistake again.

- --
Mike Cardwell https://grepular.com/ http://cardwellit.com/
OpenPGP Key 35BC AF1D 3AA2 1F84 3DC3 B0CF 70A5 F512 0018 461F
XMPP OTR Key 8924 B06A 7917 AAF3 DBB1 BF1B 295C 3C78 3EF1 46B4
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=sMke
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


graeme at graemef

Sep 4, 2012, 7:39 AM

Post #21 of 36 (1211 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

<snip>

Ladies, Gentlemen, assorted beings from Other Worlds, Artificial
Intelligences and other subscribers please note:

Give it a rest.

Please feel free to flame away in private or over on forum sites, but
don't do it here. Leave this list for real, not meta, discussions.

Thank you all, you will now be returned to your regular programming...

Graeme
(obo mods)


--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim.ml at riotm

Sep 4, 2012, 9:40 AM

Post #22 of 36 (1207 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 15:39 +0100, Graeme Fowler wrote:
> <snip>
>
> Ladies, Gentlemen, assorted beings from Other Worlds, Artificial
> Intelligences and other subscribers please note:
>
> Give it a rest.
>
> Please feel free to flame away in private or over on forum sites, but
> don't do it here. Leave this list for real, not meta, discussions.
>
> Thank you all, you will now be returned to your regular programming...
>
> Graeme
> (obo mods)
>
>
Graham. When someone uses a public list and attacks you with crazy
accusations, abuse or sarcasm there has to be some right to defend it.

However, I am no receiving off-list abuse from Mike Cardwell including
cherries like "You are ungrateful and a waste of my time" and "I ...
maintainer of the Exim project and website". Talk about disappearing up
your own backside.

I can't pretend not to be saddened by the whole thing. This was a list,
until yesterday, that I viewed as friendly, helpful and a**ehole free.
Clearly Mr Cardwell has stepped up to the mark and proved me wrong.

I only recall being abused once before on the list, and that was years
ago: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/exim/users/87311#87311

But to Mr Cardwell, who's killfile I am now proudly a member of (I feel
honoured) I do most humbly apologise. I didn't recognise you, your
majesty. Seriously - grow a pair, you were out of order.







--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


wbh at conducive

Sep 4, 2012, 9:50 AM

Post #23 of 36 (1211 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

Ron White wrote:
> When someone uses a public list and attacks you with crazy
> accusations, abuse or sarcasm there has to be some right to defend it.
>

No. There is not.

Long established principal in Common law that in a Court of "Equity"
both parties must have 'clean hands'.

Which is not the case here.

Graeme has done exactly what the Judge in such a court is bound to do.

Thrown the case OUT.

It is beyond resolution here, and no longer germane. If it EVER was.

Suggest all-hands respect that decision, learn, grow - and move on.

Bill
---
韓家標


--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim.ml at riotm

Sep 4, 2012, 11:58 AM

Post #24 of 36 (1211 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 16:50 +0000, W B Hacker wrote:
> Ron White wrote:
> > When someone uses a public list and attacks you with crazy
> > accusations, abuse or sarcasm there has to be some right to defend it.
> >
>
> No. There is not.
>
Jesus, turn it in. It's getting real old.


--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/


exim-users at spodhuis

Sep 4, 2012, 2:58 PM

Post #25 of 36 (1208 views)
Permalink
Re: Bulk Outbound Performance [In reply to]

On 2012-09-04 at 11:31 +0200, Cyborg wrote:
> Am 04.09.2012 06:53, schrieb Phil Pennock:
> > Exim's not geared, as is, for large backlogs. With enough grunt, you
> > can overcome that, but it won't be as capable as a major email-pushing
> > engine.
> >
>
> And you only need that for spamming ( legal or illegal ). I.e. my last
> multidomain server park handelt 500k mails I/O a day
> per server with exim and it was enough. And i don't know how many we
> blocked per day , but it was massive :)

Spam is unsolicited, by its nature. If it's legal, it's probably not
spam, and calling it such is unnecessarily confrontational, which
doesn't lead to resolving problems peacefully to the benefit of the
people reading the mail, who are the folks that matter the most.

If you have a production site which can generate _notification_ emails,
which are fully under the control of the user, then that is solicited.
Each mail is different, each is wanted.

There's clear white mail in volume, such as notifications from Github.

Then there are social sites which send a few types of mail; some are
definitely wanted (notifications of replies, new followers, all
controllable) and some are more dubious ("hey, you've been absent! Come
back, we're great!").

I view legitimate mail as falling into a few categories:

(1) direct personal mail
(2) mailing-list mail, which has been subscribed to, where each message
has been generated by a human, occasionally including a spam
message, which doesn't mean the list itself is spam, just that it's
sometimes abused as a vector
(3) transactional emails, which act as a notification; this could be a
purchase receipt, a push notification, a social media action
(3.1) transactional emails, via a mailing-list, such as a "commits"
mailing-list. An example of this is <exim-cvs [at] exim>, which
exemplifies both the concept and the problem when a particular
technology is embedded in the name, since all messages to that
list come from git, not CVS.
(4) Reserved, because the above may not be complete and I do not
authorise citing it to smack down a party to a conversation.

The simple act of sending large quantities of mail does not make a site
a spammer. It's cause to pause and check cautiously to investigate, and
I fully understand why many folks will decline to answer questions on a
list where folks ask for help doing it. After all, the sites sending a
large quantity of mail legitimately tend to do things like spend enough
money to hire expert postmasters to set things up and work with
receiving sites to resolve problems and leave folks happy that they're
not a spam source.

-Phil

--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All exim users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.