Mailman, Qmail -> Large Message Lost
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/5430d945dfae29e64c5b97713a2a2a8f.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
I am running
- Mailman 2.1.9
- Qmail
- CentOs
- MySQLdb module
I have been able to successfully send a mail to my list members, who are stored in a MySQL, database. This worked when there were eight members. Now that I'm trying it on a production level with approx. 200 members it doesn't work...or, at least, it hasn't after the first 45 min.
SMTP_MAX_RCPTS = 500
There are currently only 157 members in my list.
/var/qmail/concurrencyremote is 250
/var/qmail/concurrencylocal is 30
Could anyone help me improve this performance?
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/56f108518d7ee2544412cc80978e3182.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Bradley Cummins, Member Manager wrote:
Look in Mailman's smtp log for a message like
Feb 04 03:30:05 2009 (12244) <message-id> smtp to LISTNAME for 157 recips, completed in n.nnn seconds
where <message-id> is the message-id of your message and LISTNAME is the name of your list. If that log message is there, mailman has completed delivery to qmail. If n.nnn seconds is excessively long, search the FAQ at <> for performance.
If the entire delay is not explained by n.nnn seconds, the delay is in Qmail's delivery of the mail. If Qmail is delivering directly, this is a Qmail question. If Qmail is relaying via your ISP, your ISP may be throttling delivery.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/56f108518d7ee2544412cc80978e3182.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Mark Sapiro wrote:
search the FAQ at <> for performance.
Sorry, that should have been
search the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3> for performance.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/5430d945dfae29e64c5b97713a2a2a8f.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
After six months of positive results, I could use some help trying to figure out why Mailman seems to be producing inconsistent results.
You'll see in the two postings below which were taken from the smtp log that a member was dropped in the second posting. I also looked through the maillog, and found the same result there. One email address was left off of the list serve recipients.
Aug 21 17:17:22 2009 (3634) <xxx> smtp to members for 153 recips, completed in 33.377 seconds Aug 21 18:02:16 2009 (3634) <xxx> smtp to members for 152 recips, completed in 33.898 seconds
The member's roster didn't change during this time. The email address in question (which was left off the second posting) is part of the same domain as the sender and the list serve. It received the first email which originated from another domain.
Any ideas?
Thank you greatly for your input... bkc
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/56f108518d7ee2544412cc80978e3182.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Bradley Cummins, Member Manager wrote:
A post will be sent to all regular (non-digest) members with delivery enabled except it will not be sent to the poster if the poster has selected 'not metoo' and it will not be sent to any member address in a To: or Cc: header if the member has selected 'nodups'.
If the member address that didn't receive the second post was still a regular member with delivery enabled and was not the sender of the second post and was not directly addressed in To: or Cc: of the second post, check Mailman's smtp-failure log to see if there was a problem with this delivery.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/334b870d5b26878a79b2dc4cfcc500bc.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Bradley Cummins, Member Manager writes:
Any ideas?
The email address which was dropped may have been the poster or an explicit recipient, with the appropriate "no dupes, please" flag set. There are two of these; 'not metoo' says "don't send to me when I am the poster," 'nodupes' "don't send to the post to me if I am in To or Cc."
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/334b870d5b26878a79b2dc4cfcc500bc.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Stephen J. Turnbull writes:
The OP wrote me off-list (presumably expecting Reply-To munging) to indicate that the omitted address was CC'd. Figure I may as well reply here and save a couple KB of bandwidth.
Another happy ending on Mailman-Users!
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/56f108518d7ee2544412cc80978e3182.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Bradley Cummins, Member Manager wrote:
Look in Mailman's smtp log for a message like
Feb 04 03:30:05 2009 (12244) <message-id> smtp to LISTNAME for 157 recips, completed in n.nnn seconds
where <message-id> is the message-id of your message and LISTNAME is the name of your list. If that log message is there, mailman has completed delivery to qmail. If n.nnn seconds is excessively long, search the FAQ at <> for performance.
If the entire delay is not explained by n.nnn seconds, the delay is in Qmail's delivery of the mail. If Qmail is delivering directly, this is a Qmail question. If Qmail is relaying via your ISP, your ISP may be throttling delivery.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/56f108518d7ee2544412cc80978e3182.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Mark Sapiro wrote:
search the FAQ at <> for performance.
Sorry, that should have been
search the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3> for performance.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/5430d945dfae29e64c5b97713a2a2a8f.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
After six months of positive results, I could use some help trying to figure out why Mailman seems to be producing inconsistent results.
You'll see in the two postings below which were taken from the smtp log that a member was dropped in the second posting. I also looked through the maillog, and found the same result there. One email address was left off of the list serve recipients.
Aug 21 17:17:22 2009 (3634) <xxx> smtp to members for 153 recips, completed in 33.377 seconds Aug 21 18:02:16 2009 (3634) <xxx> smtp to members for 152 recips, completed in 33.898 seconds
The member's roster didn't change during this time. The email address in question (which was left off the second posting) is part of the same domain as the sender and the list serve. It received the first email which originated from another domain.
Any ideas?
Thank you greatly for your input... bkc
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/56f108518d7ee2544412cc80978e3182.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Bradley Cummins, Member Manager wrote:
A post will be sent to all regular (non-digest) members with delivery enabled except it will not be sent to the poster if the poster has selected 'not metoo' and it will not be sent to any member address in a To: or Cc: header if the member has selected 'nodups'.
If the member address that didn't receive the second post was still a regular member with delivery enabled and was not the sender of the second post and was not directly addressed in To: or Cc: of the second post, check Mailman's smtp-failure log to see if there was a problem with this delivery.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/334b870d5b26878a79b2dc4cfcc500bc.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Bradley Cummins, Member Manager writes:
Any ideas?
The email address which was dropped may have been the poster or an explicit recipient, with the appropriate "no dupes, please" flag set. There are two of these; 'not metoo' says "don't send to me when I am the poster," 'nodupes' "don't send to the post to me if I am in To or Cc."
![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/334b870d5b26878a79b2dc4cfcc500bc.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Stephen J. Turnbull writes:
The OP wrote me off-list (presumably expecting Reply-To munging) to indicate that the omitted address was CC'd. Figure I may as well reply here and save a couple KB of bandwidth.
Another happy ending on Mailman-Users!
participants (3)
-
Bradley Cummins, Member Manager
-
Mark Sapiro
-
Stephen J. Turnbull