On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 06:43:44AM -0800, LaGatorVII wrote:
> Thank you for your response. However you didn't answer my question. Our
> server keeps mail for 14days because it is a gateway for our customer's
> exchange servers. We WANT it that way so in the event of a server outage our
> server can keep the mail queued for the exchange servers until they get back
> up. Even with so few a day we get thousands of messages rejected for
> "message refused" in the deferred queue and postfix reties to send them like
> once per hour wasting our precious colo bandwidth.
The bandwidth for refused recipients is negligible, and you increase
your maximal_backoff_time to 2 or even 4 hours if you want to shave
off another factor of 2 or more.
> If you really want to help you can tell me if it will hurt anything, other
> than thinking we'll delete "good bounces" because only the spam filter uses
> this exact message and if it fails al messages are accepted by the server
> not rejected, to delete these mail files because I am now using the
> following script.
The correct solution is not to delete bounces, but to prevent them. Your
bounce delete logic will never be sufficiently precise to avoid harm.
The backlog you report is not significant. You can just ignore it, or take
action to reduce the quantity of mail rejected at the internal relays.
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header.
To unsubscribe from the postfix-users list, visit
or click the link below:
If my response solves your problem, the best way to thank me is to not
send an "it worked, thanks" follow-up. If you must respond, please put
"It worked, thanks" in the "Subject" so I can delete these quickly.