Fletcher Cocquyt wrote:
Hi, I am observing periods of qfiles/in backlogs in the 400-600 message count range that take 1-2hours to clear with the standard Mailman 2.1.9 + Spamassassin (the vette log shows these messages process in an avg of ~10 seconds each)
Is Spamassassin invoked from Mailman or from the MTA before Mailman? If this plain Mailman, 10 seconds is a hugely long time to process a single post through IncomingRunner.
If you have some Spamassassin interface like <http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=640518&group_id=103&atid=300103> that calls spamd from a Mailman handler, you might consider moving Spamassassin ahead of Mailman and using something like <http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=840426&group_id=103&atid=300103> or just header_filter_rules instead.
Is there an easy way to parallelize what looks like a single serialized Mailman queue? I see some posts re: multi-slice but nothing definitive
See the section of Defaults.py headed with
##### # Qrunner defaults #####
In order to run multiple, parallel IncomingRunner processes, you can either copy the entire QRUNNERS definition from Defaults.py to mm_cfg.py and change
('IncomingRunner', 1), # posts from the outside worldto
('IncomingRunner', 4), # posts from the outside worldwhich says run 4 IncomingRunner processes, or you can just add something like
QRUNNERS[QRUNNERS.index(('IncomingRunner',1))] = ('IncomingRunner',4)
to mm_cfg.py. You can use any power of two for the number.
I would also like the option of working this into an overall loadbalancing scheme where I have multiple smtp nodes behind an F5 loadbalancer and the nodes share an NFS backend...
The following search will return some information.
<http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Amail.python.org++inurl%3Amailman++%22l...>
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan