james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Norman Maurer ...@byteaction.de>
Subject RE: Expected Outbound Throughput?
Date Mon, 19 Jun 2006 05:12:58 GMT
Hi guys,

should we raise the default to 4 or at least 2 ? I think 1 delivery
thread will be to low for most installations..

bye
Norman

Am Sonntag, den 18.06.2006, 23:00 -0500 schrieb JWM:
> Norman,
> 
> Thanks for the info.  Very useful.  
> 
> I think my biggest problem was the delivery threads setting was still at the
> default.  I had simply overlooked that setting.  I am curious why the
> default is 1.  Seems to me that a normal default configuration would want at
> least 2 or 3 threads doing delivery.
> 
> Anyway, it's running much better now that I've changed the thread setting.
> 
> Thanks again.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Norman Maurer [mailto:nm@byteaction.de] 
> Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 1:44 AM
> To: James Users List
> Subject: Re: Expected Outbound Throughput?
> 
> Am Freitag, den 16.06.2006, 15:41 -0500 schrieb JWM:
> > I completely understand that many factors can affect throughput, but I'd
> > just like to find out if I'm in the correct ballpark, or if I have some
> > problems that need to be addressed.
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > When my outbound spool gets full and is running full-throttle sending
> > outbound emails as fast as it can, according to the log files, I'm
> averaging
> > about 5 emails going out every minute.  This works out to about 10 seconds
> > per email.
> 
> Maybe you should try to increase the deliveryThreads. The default is:
> <deliveryThreads> 1 </deliveryThreads>
> 
> This is seems anyway a bit low to me. We should maybe increase the
> standard value. We use about 10 here!
> Anyway you can read about throughput here:
> http://wiki.apache.org/james/JamesByTheNumbers
> 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > I'm not even close to being network bound.  I'm on a co-lo server with a
> > major provider.  My network adapter isn't showing anywhere near capacity.
> > My processor is running at 4-5%.  So I'm assuming all of the time is spent
> > in contacting remote servers and establishing the connection to send the
> > email.  Does it really take that long per email?
> 
> Yes it can. But IMHO its not normal. At first i whould check if your DNS
> settings are correct. If thats correct i whould check the firewall. Or
> maybe the traffic shaping if you use some.
> 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Just wondering if, in the interest of curbing spam, my co-lo provider is
> > possibly throttling back on port 25 or purposely inserting delays.  I've
> > heard of DSL and cable providers doing that for home users.  But hopefully
> > not a business co-lo provider..
> 
> Normally they only block port 25 completly if they want not clients to
> send email without use of their server.
> If so your provider maybe offer a way of using his mailserver as relay.
> 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Or is it possible that the target servers are inserting delays?  It seems
> > that "outblaze.com" almost always takes 8-10 minutes to send to.
> > 
> Thats also possible and is named tarpitting. But its not so famous. Read
> here for more infos what tarpid is:
> http://www.palomine.net/qmail/tarpit.html
> 
> Also james support this feature in latest 2.3.0 release ;-)
> 
> You could test how long it takes to send an email to the server by use
> telnet and send "directly" an email to an recipient on this server.
> 
> >  
> > 
> > Anyway, could you tell me if averaging 5 emails per minute running full
> > throttle is pretty much the norm, or is this seriously low?
> > 
> Yes its to low. Like i said before.
> >  
> > 
> > Jerry
> 
> 
> bye
> Norman
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org
> 
> !EXCUBATOR:1,449621cd43371672184743!

Mime
View raw message