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

Re: Bulk Mailing Performance

Expand Messages
  • Jose-Marcio Martins da Cruz
    ... Not really ridiculous. All those benchmarks are interesting, as they represent, say, the intrinsic performance of the software . The problem is to tell
    Message 1 of 30 , Sep 3, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      DTNX Postmaster wrote:

      >
      > They aren't my perfect world criteria, but a direct quote from Sam
      > Jones' earlier buzzword compliant reply.
      >
      > It was meant to illustrate the often ridiculous nature of vendor
      > benchmarks, how useless they are in real world situations, and
      > therefore how silly it is to pick software based on theoretical limits
      > you will most likely never hit.

      Not really ridiculous. All those benchmarks are interesting, as they represent,
      say, the "intrinsic performance of the software". The problem is to tell (for
      the vendor) and to take into account (for the reader) the conditions at which
      the benchmark was done.

      But, sure, two pieces of software can be compared only if measurings are done
      with the same conditions. And one software which has better "intrinsic
      performance" may not be better in real world conditions.


      --
    • Sam Jones
      ... Yes, it was. Well done. The question applied to both MTA s and funny enough, the use of Aliases on the internet is nothing new. Thanks to those that
      Message 2 of 30 , Sep 3, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        On Sun, 2012-09-02 at 22:46 +0200, Lorens Kockum wrote:
        > The exact same question was sent by someone calling himself
        > "Ron White" to the exim mailing list at almost exactly the same
        > time. Peddling one's services by soliciting comparisons with
        > competitors is so passé . . .
        >
        Yes, it was. Well done. The question applied to both MTA's and funny
        enough, the use of Aliases on the internet is nothing new.

        Thanks to those that contributed useful information. I think it's safe
        to say that the sales blurb is looking at a very basic scenario.
      • Daniel L. Miller
        ... [...] ... Knowing absolutely nothing about the software mentioned - I would say there is a difference between messages SENT vs messages DELIVERED. I
        Message 3 of 30 , Sep 3, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          On 9/2/2012 11:14 AM, Sam Jones wrote:
          > On Sun, 2012-09-02 at 15:39 +0000, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
          >> On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 10:43:07AM +0100, Sam Jones wrote:
          >>
          >>> More to satisfy my own curiosity than anything else, I'm wondering about
          >>> the performance that could be squeezed out of Postfix in a bulk mailing
          >>> capacity.
          >> Running a high volume bulk email platform is not a software problem.
          >> It is a logistics problem. Enrolling on the whitelists and feedback
          >> loops of various large email providers, handling bounce-backs,
          >> jumping through rate-limit hoops, ...
          [...]
          >>
          >> I guess what I'm querying in a way is some of the sales blurb from
          >> people like PowerMTA & GreenArrow and the remarks they make about open
          >> source solutions like Postfix etc. This one in particular: "Open source
          >> Mail Transfer Agents (MTAs) often max out between 20 and 30 thousand
          >> messages per hour. GreenArrow can send 300,000 messages per hour—more
          >> than ten times as fast."
          >>

          Knowing absolutely nothing about the software mentioned - I would say
          there is a difference between messages SENT vs messages DELIVERED. I
          realize many will immediately correct me and say even Postfix can't
          guarantee delivery to a given recipient - merely acknowledgement of the
          recipient server's acceptance - but I don't know how else to
          discriminate between a single-pass of a message, without retries,
          without verification, without greylist tolerance, without reporting,
          just knock on the door and try to shove it on - vs reliable message
          handling.

          Again, knowing nothing about alternatives to Postfix - I question
          whether software intended for bulk mailing purposes is designed in such
          a manner. As a crude analogy, even the best machine gun doesn't have a
          fraction of the accuracy of a quality sniper rifle - but on the other
          hand a machine gun will put a lot more lead downrange. Different tools
          for different purposes. Spray-and-Pray - or deliver the personal message.

          --
          Daniel
        • 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
          Message 4 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            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.
          • Wietse Venema
            ... Is this a troll? I have documented Postfix performance claims on Wikipedia. Be sure to read the cautionary note about factors outside of Postfix that in
            Message 5 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              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.

              Is this a troll?

              I have documented Postfix performance claims on Wikipedia. Be sure
              to read the cautionary note about factors outside of Postfix that
              in practice limit the delivery performance.

              Wietse
            • Joe
              ... In our experience, postfix can blast out messages at rates which are orders of magnitude faster than the other end is willing to receive it. The
              Message 6 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                On 06/12/2013 12:17 PM, fletch wrote:
                > 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.


                In our experience, postfix can blast out messages at rates which are
                orders of magnitude faster than the other end is willing to receive it.
                The "substantial benefits" you speak of are mainly along the lines of
                easier management tools and integration of same with various other email
                related components in one convenient interface.

                Joe
              • Peer Heinlein
                ... You already lost. I did this even 5-6 years ago with 3-4 millionen mails / hour in one postfix instance on one stupid dual-xeon server with 100 MBit
                Message 7 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  Am 12.06.2013 21:17, schrieb fletch:

                  > 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.

                  You already lost.

                  I did this even 5-6 years ago with 3-4 millionen mails / hour in one
                  postfix instance on one stupid dual-xeon server with 100 MBit uplink.

                  > 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.

                  They're making sales with people, that believe that people coming from a
                  comercial company are always and automatically better then everbody else.


                  Peer


                  --
                  Heinlein Support GmbH
                  Schwedter Str. 8/9b, 10119 Berlin

                  http://www.heinlein-support.de

                  Tel: 030 / 405051-42
                  Fax: 030 / 405051-19

                  Zwangsangaben lt. §35a GmbHG: HRB 93818 B / Amtsgericht
                  Berlin-Charlottenburg,
                  Geschäftsführer: Peer Heinlein -- Sitz: Berlin
                • Robert Schetterer
                  ... 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
                  Message 8 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    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, +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
                  • fletch
                    Peer, There s no way that s a production figure. You may have queued that many, but I seriously doubt you got anything close to 3-4 million/hour when postfix
                    Message 9 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Peer,

                      There's no way that's a production figure. You may have queued that many,
                      but I seriously doubt you got anything close to 3-4 million/hour when
                      postfix was actually conducting delivery with the remote gateways...



                      On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Peer Heinlein [via Postfix] <
                      ml-node+s1071664n58876h85@...> wrote:

                      > Am 12.06.2013 21:17, schrieb fletch:
                      >
                      > > 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.
                      >
                      > You already lost.
                      >
                      > I did this even 5-6 years ago with 3-4 millionen mails / hour in one
                      > postfix instance on one stupid dual-xeon server with 100 MBit uplink.
                      >
                      > > 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.
                      >
                      > They're making sales with people, that believe that people coming from a
                      > comercial company are always and automatically better then everbody else.
                      >
                      >
                      > Peer
                      >
                      >
                      > --
                      > Heinlein Support GmbH
                      > Schwedter Str. 8/9b, 10119 Berlin
                      >
                      > http://www.heinlein-support.de
                      >
                      > Tel: 030 / 405051-42
                      > Fax: 030 / 405051-19
                      >
                      > Zwangsangaben lt. §35a GmbHG: HRB 93818 B / Amtsgericht
                      > Berlin-Charlottenburg,
                      > Geschäftsführer: Peer Heinlein -- Sitz: Berlin
                      >
                      >
                      > ------------------------------
                      > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
                      > below:
                      >
                      > http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/Bulk-Mailing-Performance-tp50222p58876.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-tp50222p58878.html
                      Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
                    • Ben Johnson
                      ... This point is somewhat moot, quite frankly, because the performance claims as documented on Wikipedia state: Postfix has been clocked at ~300 message
                      Message 10 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On 6/12/2013 4:40 PM, fletch wrote:
                        > Peer,
                        >
                        > There's no way that's a production figure. You may have queued that many,
                        > but I seriously doubt you got anything close to 3-4 million/hour when
                        > postfix was actually conducting delivery with the remote gateways...
                        >

                        This point is somewhat moot, quite frankly, because the performance
                        claims as documented on Wikipedia state:

                        Postfix has been clocked at ~300 message deliveries/second[6] across the
                        Internet, running on commodity hardware (a vintage-2003 Dell 1850 system
                        with battery-backed MegaRAID controller and two SCSI disks). This
                        delivery rate is an order of magnitude below the "intrinsic" limit of
                        2500 message deliveries/second[6] that was achieved *with the mail queue
                        on a RAM disk while delivering to the "discard" transport (with a
                        dual-core Opteron system in 2007).*

                        Nobody (besides perhaps Peer) is making any claim with respect to
                        "real-world" performance. The performance claims as documented assume
                        factors only within Postfix and the computer on which it's runnings'
                        control.

                        -Ben
                      • AFCommerce LLC
                        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,
                        Message 11 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                        • 0 Attachment
                          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 <rs@...> 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, +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

                        • Roel Wagenaar
                          ... say ... people on ... software ... Obviously YES. And quite a lot of feeders too. ... DFTT -- Roel Wagenaar, Linux-User #469851 with the Linux Counter;
                          Message 12 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                          • 0 Attachment
                            wietse@... (Wietse Venema) wrote:

                            > 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.
                            >
                            > Is this a troll?



                            Obviously YES.


                            And quite a lot of feeders too.


                            > I have documented Postfix performance claims on Wikipedia. Be sure
                            > to read the cautionary note about factors outside of Postfix that
                            > in practice limit the delivery performance.
                            >
                            > Wietse
                            >
                            >

                            DFTT


                            --
                            Roel Wagenaar,

                            Linux-User #469851 with the Linux Counter; http://linuxcounter.net/

                            Antw.: Omdat het de volgorde verstoord waarin mensen tekst lezen.
                            Vraag: Waarom is top-posting een slechte gewoonte?
                            Antw.: Top-posting.
                            Vraag: Wat is het meest ergerlijke in e-mail?

                            Diplomacy is the art of letting someone else get your way.
                          • fletch
                            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
                            Message 13 of 30 , 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.
                            • Viktor Dukhovni
                              ... Let s not go down this rabbit-hole. At this point in the thread we re no longer talking about Postfix. -- Viktor.
                              Message 14 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                              • 0 Attachment
                                On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 03:53:17PM -0700, fletch wrote:

                                > 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.

                                Let's not go down this rabbit-hole. At this point in the thread we're no
                                longer talking about Postfix.

                                --
                                Viktor.
                              • Marius Gologan
                                Bulk doesn t mean to blast the world in 1 second with emails. 1) The magic of PowerMTA consists in rotating IPs base on returned codes and returned message
                                Message 15 of 30 , Jun 30, 2013
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Bulk doesn't mean to blast the world in 1 second with emails.


                                  1) The magic of PowerMTA consists in rotating IPs base on returned codes and
                                  returned message patterns. e.g.: if an IP addresses is banned by an ESP,
                                  will backoff on a different IP address in order in an attempt to achieve
                                  delivery. Thus, is designed for email marketing area, not for corporate
                                  email service.
                                  If you read the 330 pages guide you'll find that, by default, is sending 2
                                  messages via 2 parallel connections. Can be increased considerable, but you
                                  need to be a genius in 'warp speed' throttling and have IPs+Sender Domains
                                  as Amazon SES has.
                                  It is very limited for inbound messages handling.

                                  2) Postfix is a true performance MTA, used world wide (mature).
                                  The Magic of Postfix is quite complex. E.g: unlike PowerMTA, provides
                                  dynamic/adaptive throttling which is quite intelligent. It looks like it
                                  doesn't provide a way for rotating IPs as PowerMTA does. Thus, I don't see
                                  how spammers prefer Postfix. I'm still learning about Postfix secrets and
                                  how much creative can be.
                                  In my opinion, the performance for bulk deliverability should be reduce in
                                  Postfix, not increased, in order to meat ESP requirements in these days.

                                  Both MTAs are designed for two different purposes, thus, you cannot compare
                                  them.

                                  Postfix, on a *nix machine, is a true Email Server - a complex platform with
                                  many features, covering all aspects and requirements you can imagine (except
                                  the one mentioned above), but, often, many steps ahead MS Exchange.
                                  PowerMTA is an advanced sending software application for email marketers,
                                  covering exclusively their requirements and needs of rotating IPs per ESP.

                                  Marius.



                                  --
                                  View this message in context: http://postfix.1071664.n5.nabble.com/Bulk-Mailing-Performance-tp50222p59412.html
                                  Sent from the Postfix Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.