[Mailman-Developers] Bounce processing performance, pending.pck possible bug/redesign

[Richard Barrett]

At 13:45 26/04/2003, John Distler wrote:
>I'm currently running Mailman 2.1.1
>I recently completed splitting my large 190,000 member list into 72 sublists
>for performance
>reasons (primarily bounce processing).
>
>I split the lists leaving bounce disabled addresses in the mix to be able to
>measure performance
>of the new setup.
>
>My first mailing to my 72 sublists generated over 15,000 bounces, however
>the performance wasn't what I expected.
>
>The first few bounces were processed at over 8 per second.  However that
>slowed to 5 seconds PER BOUNCE near the end.
>
>After investigation I noticed that ~mailman/data/pending.pck had grown to
>almost 2 megabytes in size.
>
>Even though I have my bounce threshold set to 5.0 and NO addresses were
>disabled because of bouncing, pending.pck contained over
>15,000  "re-enable" entries along with generated confirmation strings.

With a threshold of 5.0, it is going to require multiple bounces for each 
mail address to get it disabled. MM needs to keep records to do this.

If you have a 'dirty' membership list, why not drop the threshhold to less 
than one e.g. 0.5, so that the next mailing disables the bouncing 
subscribers immediately; that is assuming that the returning addresses 
matches the subscribed addresses and you are not using VERP.

>I double checked the bounce information was correctly registered by dumping
>the config.pck for the mailing list.  None of these addresses were disabled
>and the bounce information is correct.
>
>I looked at the code in Bouncer.py at the "registerbounce" routine and this
>behavior appears to be by design.
>Am I missing something here or is this a bug?
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Mailman-Developers mailing list
>Mailman-Developers at python.org
>http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers