[Mailman-Developers] Re: your mail

[Scott]

On Thu, May 28, 1998 at 07:41:17PM -0700, John Viega wrote:
| On Thu, May 28, 1998 at 10:29:17PM -0400, Corbett Klempay wrote:
| > Does anyone have any quantitative (or maybe even non-quantitative) idea of
| > Mailman's performance, especially compared to direct competitors such as
| > Majordomo?
| 
| It's more efficient than Majordomo, especially when doing bulk mailing.
| 
| > Do we know of any very high volume lists being run on Mailman
| 
| How high volume?  I know of some lists with 5000+ users, they don't
| seem to have any problems.  The biggest one I run has been over 2000
| strong.

Wow!


| > (or is this even a good idea?).  I imagine that something like ezmlm would
| > probably obliterate both Majordomo as well as Mailman as far as
| > performance, but I don't see the average list needing the kind of fiendish
| > performance ezmlm provides (don't me wrong; ezmlm has a lot to recommend
| > it); most people could (and would) trade ezmlm's speed for Mailman's slick
| > web interface.  But what I'm wondering is do we know how big this
| > performance tradeoff is?
| 
| You'd do a lot better performance wise trading sendmail for qmail than
| Mailman for ezmlm. 

just wanted to suggest vmailer as well as qmail. personally, i like
vmailer a lot more.   it's about as efficient as qmail for mailling
list delivery, a lot more efficient than qmail for 1 to 1 delivery, it
has sane logging, and is more effectively a sendmail drop in
replacement.  i'm using it with mailman, and it required no changes
whatsoever to the distribution to work.

scott