[Mimedefang] Socket map performance
Andrzej Adam Filip
anfi at onet.eu
Tue Nov 24 16:20:18 EST 2009
"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
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!"
More information about the MIMEDefang