"John Viega" <viega@list.org> wrote:
It's more efficient than Majordomo, especially when doing bulk mailing.
This may be a naive question, but how can that be?
Majordomo doesn't actually get involved in mail delivery (at least the versions I've used). It just maintains an address file which is read by sendmail (or whatever MTA you're using) to do the actual delivery. So what does it mean to say that majordomo isn't efficient at bulk mailing?
The assumption being that you're using sendmail, I should have said that. What happens is, majordomo uses a single sendmail connection. On lists of 2000 people, it can take hours to deliver to everyone, because w/ a list that large, there are going to be lots of machines that are temporarily inaccessable, etc. Sendmail just marches down the list of addresses, sending each one. If one of them blocks, sendmail will stall delivery for everyone for a few minutes.
Mailman by default forks off several versions of sendmail at once. You can set the number of sendmails to be whatever you like. For a mailing list of mine that used to take several hours to completely deliver a mail, Mailman reduced the time to about 2 minutes.
Make sense?
On Fri, May 29, 1998 at 07:38:57AM -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
"John Viega" <viega@list.org> wrote:
It's more efficient than Majordomo, especially when doing bulk mailing.
This may be a naive question, but how can that be?
Majordomo doesn't actually get involved in mail delivery (at least the versions I've used). It just maintains an address file which is read by sendmail (or whatever MTA you're using) to do the actual delivery. So what does it mean to say that majordomo isn't efficient at bulk mailing?
Roy Smith <roy@popmail.med.nyu.edu> New York University School of Medicine 550 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
participants (2)
-
John Viega -
Roy Smith