[Mailman-Users] Options for increasing throughput

Mark Sapiro mark at msapiro.net
Fri Jun 20 18:01:21 CEST 2008

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
that calls spamd from a Mailman handler, you might consider moving
Spamassassin ahead of Mailman and using something like
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
and change

    ('IncomingRunner', 1), # posts from the outside world


    ('IncomingRunner', 4), # posts from the outside world

which 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.


Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan

More information about the Mailman-Users mailing list