On Fri, 15 May 1998, Peter Chen wrote:
> I can't find a qmail SRPM or RPM package. Moreover, since I don't have much
There isn't any. The qmail author permits free use of the program, but
won't allow redistribution of it. So you have to get it from him. (Well,
now he allows redistribution, but only of the base tarball, so still no
RPM). So you have to compile and install it yourself.
It's a very good program. My advice is install it on a small non-critical
system to get a feel for it.
> We have a Sun Enterprise 5000 web server that sent several thousands of
> mail inquiries in a burst. I am afraid the Linux sendmail server might be
> swarmed. I personally saw that there were more than 2000 open sendmail
> sessions on the Sun server by doing a "ps -ef | grep sendmail | wc". Is
> this possible for Linux kernel 2.0.33/24 or the stock sendmail in RH5.0?
Well, yes; but 2,000 connections is just an unholy huge number. If you
assume each one uses about 512K of actual RAM (not counting shared
libraries) then that's 1GB of RAM. You simply can't stuff that much into
a PC. So your server will bog down if you ever have 2,000 actual running
Sendmails. My advice is to have a lot of swap. :) Were all of those
2,000 connections actual sendmails, or were some of them zombies (which
don't take up any RAM)? Sendmail under load does spew out a lot of
zombies, so your load is possibly less than you might think.
> Yes, you guessed it. All 4000+ mailboxes will be on the same server. Is
> this realistic for RH5.0? Can /var/spool/mail directory contain so many
> files (mailboxes)? If not, what is the best way to place the mailboxes?
No limit on the number of mailbox files. Linux keeps the directory
entries cached, as well, so the number of directory entries doesn't even
slow down the access. Plus configuring multiple mailbox directories is
beyond the extent of my magical powers.
> Is 2.0.34 released. I heard 2.0.29 is more stable then 2.0.30-33 under
> heavy load. Has 2.0.34 fixed the problem with 2.0.30-33?
No, it's not, but it will be probably next week, which is probably before
you will be ready to go in any case. I am using pre11b with good results
right now. Yes, 2.0.34 fixes every known bug including the crashes under
load. I think it's the best 2.0 yet.
> It is using the NCR 53c875 UW controller. Heard that it is cheap and has
> good driver support.
You heard correctly. :)
> What do you recommend, hardware or software raid? If hardware raid is
I only have used software raid. Hardware raid is obviously more
efficient, and will save on your CPU (and disk controller) but I can't
recommend any specific products.
> Yes, can't rule that out. So if both sendmail and POP/IMAP server are
> running, is 256MB sufficient? Or should I go for 512MB to play safe?
If you really have 4,000 users, you can afford 512M.
> So you recommend 512MB of RAM for a couple hundred outstanding POP clients?
Well, that's probably overkill; 512M should be good for 500-1000 total POP
and sendmail processes.
>
> > If on the other hand they
> > don't all do this but check their email at a more leisurely pace, then
> > your system as it stands should be fine.
> >
> >
> > --
> > PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST
> ARCHIVES!
> > http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips
> /mailing-lists
> > To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> > "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
>
>
> --
> PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
> http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
> To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
>
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
