[Mimedefang] Socket map performance

[Andrzej Adam Filip]

"David F. Skoll" <dfs at roaringpenguin.com> wrote:
> Michiel Brandenburg wrote:
>
>> What might be a nice tradeoff is using the socket map feature of
>> sendmail to hook sendmail into mimedefang that way.  Dunno how that
>> would impact performance but it might be a nice tradeoff.
>
> Performance impact is severe.  We used the sockemap -> MIMEDefang
> path in an older version of our commercial software, but we had
> to remove it and use a different technique because of the horrible
> performance.

Have you used it for standard maps? (e.g. access or virtusertable)
YES => Have you tried to reduce (horrible) number of lookups issued by
"any map" sendmail.cf design?

>> As I recall the socket map protocol is pretty lightweight but might
>> still be too slow, in my case it works fine even with about 1/2 mails
>> per sec.
>
> We tend to concentrate our optimizations on medium-sized
> installations, by which I mean about 25 msgs/second (= about 2
> million/day) or higher.  The low-end ones aren't worth worrying about
> just because the load is easily managed.

-- 
[pl>en: Andrew] Andrzej Adam Filip : anfi at onet.eu
"My sense of purpose is gone! I have no idea who I AM!"
"Oh, my God... You've.. You've turned him into a DEMOCRAT!"
  -- Doonesbury