"SR" == Sean Reifschneider <jafo-mailman-developers@tummy.com> writes:
SR> I guess you'd better define "relatively common hardware".
SR> What are we talking about here? Some benchmarking I did of
SR> real-world recpieints has shown that a dual PII 450 with a GB
SR> of RAM and the mail spool set up on a 500MB RAM disc, and
SR> upstream connectivity of dual DS3s, was able to handle around
SR> 100k deliveries an hour. This was using qmail with a remote
SR> concurrency of 250 and a bunch of little tricks.Very interesting, and good numbers to know. I'm here with a single PIII 650, 256MB and no RAM disk. My currently limiting factor is my IP connection, but that should soon improve considerably.
The 100k deliveries/hr that your seeing -- what size messages are you seeing? Is that relatively constant as a product of the number of msgs/hr times the number of recipients/msg? Do you think Mailman is the limiting factor to your throughput and have you done any benchmarking of the MM software?
Right now, I'm primarily interested in seeing how MM handles very large recipient lists. Later I'd like to do some testing to see how much we can boost throughput, but I'd check with addr-volunteers before doing that kind of testing.
SR> So, unless I missed something pretty serious in the
SR> configuration of this environment, "relatively common
SR> hardware" should include at least a dozen boxes.Which I definitely don't have access to.
SR> Again, this was a real-world list of around 400k addresses of
SR> users who had signed up to receive a particular announcement.
SR> They have since moved to a cluster of around 10 machines
SR> running some custom software and are getting over 1M per hour
SR> with that setup.
>> email lists of varying sizes. I'd like to create lists of 1k,
>> 10k, 100k, 250k, 500k, and 1M recipients. Do you think between
>> us we can gather 1M fake recipients for a test list?
SR> I could probably donate 5% to 10% of that amount across a few
SR> upstream lines.That would be great. I'm not quite ready to start this kind of testing, but soon.
Thanks, -Barry