Re: A question about Postfix and virus scanning
- Stan Hoeppner:
> Wietse Venema put forth on 12/1/2009 3:47 PM:I can assure you that there is no such caching the Postfix SMTP
> > Surely, mail is injected via SMTP, and therefore, the Postfix SMTP
> > server will attempt to lookup the client hostname and IP address;
> > since they are using SMTP-based content filters, that is another
> > source of name service lookups. All this presents a load on name
> > service. I have seen enough to know that a bad DNS configuration
> > can do wonders for performance.
> Assuming the test streams are generated by a handful of SPECmail load
> generator hosts, the hostnames and addresses of those client machines
> would quickly be cached, no?
server before the SMTP-based content filter, and not in the Postfix
SMTP server after the SMTP-based content filter. In addition, Postfix
and content filters may do other DNS lookups for reputation etc.
Ideally, name/address/reputation lookups will have only minimal
impact, but I was explicitly not talking about ideal configurations
when I wrote:
If your performance is inadequate, I suggest that you do a detailed
system performance analysis to find out if the limit is CPU,
memory, file I/O or perhaps some trivial DNS configuration problem.
I would not be so quick to dismiss DNS-related problems out of hand
in scenarios that involve synthetic email messages.
- Jerry wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 01:33:51 -0500The difference is obvious: everyone loves to hate Microsoft and Google
> Michael Katz <mknews@...> replied:
>> Responding to support lists is not a sales strategy, and if it was it
>> would be the worst strategy imaginable because it doesn't work. We
>> sell software because we have to make a living but answering on lists
>> is more of a personality trait of mine than anything else.
>> Regardless, the open source vs. commercial argument is largely dying
>> because the real argument, in the US at least, is becoming Google vs.
>> anything else. Their free offerings are ending the need for Postfix,
>> Amavis, what I make and countless other email products - commercial,
>> open source or otherwise. Somehow we have all become addicted to the
>> free stuff that billionairesgive us while spurning the hard work of a
>> few entrepreneurs trying to make a living. We are a tiny little
>> company and I answer stuff to try to be helpful, that's it. Save the
>> cries of evil for people that matter like Google, we are insignificant
> IMHO, Google is employing the business method know as "deferred
> gratification". It is so transparent that I find it hard to believe
> that there has not been more chatter regarding its business dealings.
> It appears that only now have some large corporations and government
> entities started to take action against them. What really annoys me is
> that when Microsoft lowered prices on some of its retail products they
> were accused of using the same business tactic. When Google does
> essentially the same thing, barely a word is spoken. Too many users have
> become functionally socialist in regards to software.
can do no wrong. Simple as that.