Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

293761Re: Bulk Mailing Performance

Expand Messages
  • fletch
    Jun 12, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      What do you mean by: "...they can not come close to postfix as far as email
      standards go"? My understanding is that powermta fully complies with the
      various RFCs.

      Also, I'm sure there are far more spammers using free software like postfix
      rather than paying for a commercial product.

      On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:57 PM, AFCommerce LLC [via Postfix] <
      ml-node+s1071664n58880h9@...> wrote:

      > I know powermta as well as postfix and I think I can add to some of the
      > comments on here, powermta is not cheap by any means and of course postfix
      > is free, however pmta might have some settings out of the box that are
      > optimized for bulk but they can not come close to postfix as far as email
      > standards go, incoming mail, etc (in my opinion) mainly from how many
      > servers are using it, basically postfix, exim and sendmail create the
      > standards that a company like pmta has to try to follow.
      > But the main reason bulk mailers mainly pay for pmta is because it has the
      > ability to send on many ips/hostnames far easier than postfix, since
      > postfix wasn't built (by choice) to send from 100s of ips and domains
      > because that can easily become a tool for a spammer (a spammer could try to
      > modify postfix I assume). The commercial support is a 2nd reason, most of
      > us on this list wouldn't need that type of support, but a legitimate
      > company who doesn't have a decent support staff would be interested in that.
      > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Robert Schetterer <[hidden email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=58880&i=0>
      > > wrote:
      >> Am 12.06.2013 21:17, schrieb fletch:
      >> > The postfix performance claims made via this thread are far-fetched to
      >> say
      >> > the least. Most postfix users will only see outbound throughput in the
      >> > range of ~250,000/hour per instance in a production setting. Yet,
      >> people on
      >> > here are claiming 10 million/hour? I guess that would be possible if a
      >> > sender were to run, say, 40 postfix instances which would be a complete
      >> > management nightmare of course.
      >> >
      >> > Obviously, vendors like Port25 (company behind PowerMTA) and GreenArrow
      >> > would not be able to make any sales if the benefits of commercial
      >> software
      >> > products v. open source were not substantial.
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > --
      >> > View this message in context:
      >> http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/Bulk-Mailing-Performance-tp50222p58873.html
      >> > Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
      >> >
      >> however magic jedi software overpower setup you might use for deliver
      >> out, you never will reach the higher powered master level , where you
      >> can press all others to take your mails at a number in time periods you
      >> might like , so using paid services/software for bulk maybe a good idea
      >> by many things, comparing it to some default settings of postfix is
      >> simply nonsense and typical marketing bla bla
      >> Best Regards
      >> MfG Robert Schetterer
      >> --
      >> [*] sys4 AG
      >> http://sys4.de, <a href="tel:%2B49%20%2889%29%2030%2090%2046%2064"
      >> value="+498930904664">+49 (89) 30 90 46 64
      >> Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München
      >> Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
      >> Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Axel von der Ohe, Marc Schiffbauer
      >> Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
      > ------------------------------
      > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
      > below:
      > http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/Bulk-Mailing-Performance-tp50222p58880.html
      > To unsubscribe from Bulk Mailing Performance, click here<http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=50222&code=cnVzc2VsbC5mbGV0Y2hlckBnbWFpbC5jb218NTAyMjJ8NjMyNDM5NDgw>
      > .
      > NAML<http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml>

      View this message in context: http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/Bulk-Mailing-Performance-tp50222p58882.html
      Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
    • Show all 30 messages in this topic