[Mailman-Users] Pay per list?
bronto at csd-bes.net
Wed Nov 13 18:43:33 CET 2002
Thanks for the detailed answer. Read on:
>Please see the FAQ:
>Read it well and carefully. Follow ALL the instructions. Loosely:
Will do. Thanks.
> Buy some RAM. Stuff your box full of it. Get up to the couple Gig+
> range if you can (I don't know Macs well to know how easy that is).
> Don't even attempt this without at least 512Meg (1Gig will be much
It's already maxed out at 768 mb. But another off list suggestion
was that I would want to get a dedicated box for this anyway, since
no matter how fast I got it to go, it would still take a while and
would block other activities in the meantime.
> Get a new disk for /var/spool/postfix and another separate disk for
> /var/log. If you have the opportunity, make the spool disk faster. At
> this point don't worry about IDE vs SCSI.
Very interesting suggestion, and disks are sooo cheap now.
> If you can smarthost all outbound traffic to a different system from
> your Mailman system. Set it up similarly as above/below (distinct
> spindle for spool and log, postfix config etc). This simple step
> would make handling this sort of load almost easy. If you can't do
> this, check with your ISP and see if they'd be willing to smarthost
> for you. Many will.
"smarthost" is a new term for me. I'll look it up.
>Go straight to Mailman v2.1. Don't bother with 2.0.
> As a comparable under Postfix on a dual PII-333 with 512Meg RAM
> sitting on a couple T3s and a T1 I can sustain 1,400 deliveries a
> minute. You should be comfortably able to sustain at least half that
> given that you've a slightly less muscled box and your outbound
> bandwidth situation is likely skinnier.
As this is not delivering time sensitive information, these
expectations are encouraging.
> Given a reasonable distribution of slow MX'es (which is a silly
> meaningless unrelative thing to say, but hey) that would mean that
> you'd drain the majority of the queue down to the slow MXes in about
> an hour (accounting for IO and spool contention). If you want to use
> your system for anything else during that time (expect system loads in
> the 20 - 30 range for the majority of that time) you can reduce the
> number of queue runners or throw in some bandwidth profiling, but note
> that that will extend drain time non-linearly.
That's a good hint. If this goes through, I might use this as a
dedicated list server and try to recruit other list clients and give
them specific time slots for sending messages to keep them spaced
apart. Or maybe it will be a dedicated mail server, but require them
to send the messages late at night.
>Be prepared for a fairly extensive period of fiddling getting this
>really happy. You're not up in the range where things get really
>sensitive, but you're getting there. Some care and discretion will be
Thanks again for your excellent suggestions.
More information about the Mailman-Users