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

Re: Bulk Mailing Performance

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 30 , Sep 3, 2012
      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 2 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
        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 3 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
          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 4 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
            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 5 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
              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 6 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                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 7 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                  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 8 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                    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 9 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                      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 10 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                        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 11 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                          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 12 of 30 , Jun 12, 2013
                            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 13 of 30 , Jun 30, 2013
                              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.