Re: destination_rate_delay and connection_reuse_time_limit
- Hi Viktor,Thanks once again for helping me on this.Please understand that I'm very "open" and thankful for any help. I'm also trying to understand what you meant.Getting whitelisted is always the best solution, but believe me, there are some providers that just don't answer any email, they just won't help us to even work in compliance with their rules. Thats why I'm asking for help here.Sometimes you guys speak in a very advanced language and it may be hard for some people to understand what you're meaning. Worse than that is when we try to explain our problem and we're not clear enough. So I tried to better explain myself and then you became with another solution.Anyway, I'll search how to use this "next hoop" feature and see if it fixes the issue. Although I'm still having to respect the amount of message per time frame so the question persists: how can I low down delivery to these destinations without opening too many connections to them? Having them all in one only transport/nexthoop will not fix the problem if I don't control the throughput, right?Sorry for the questions, I'm really trying to understand the solution here.Thanks once again.Em 07/01/2013, às 14:47, Viktor Dukhovni <postfix-users@...> escreveu:
On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 02:37:03PM -0200, Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE wrote:
I've done something very similar.
If you want help, please take some time to read and follow the
advice you receive completely and accurately. "Similar" is another
way of saying "incorrect".
I created different named transports for specific domains and
have all domains I need a special treatment to use this named
To achieve a total concurrency limit across multiple destination
domains, you must specify a common nexthop, not just a common
So since I'm using Postfix + MySQL, I have a transport table with
all domains and destination transport. Its quite the same thing
No, it is not, since it leaves out the common nexthop which
consolidates the queues for all the domains.
Yet, I'm still with the same problem.
Do take the time to follow advice completely and accurately.
So in the real life, I have about 10.000 domains that are hosted in
the same hosting company. This company has a rigid control of their
Your best bet is to get whitelisted by the receiving system for a higher
If your average input message rate for these domains falls below the
current cap, and you're just trying to smooth out the spikes, the
advice I gate is correct, if you're willing to listen.
Is there anything else I can do to have a better control of my throughput?
Understand that Postfix queues are per transport/nexthop, not merely
per transport. To schedule mail via a specific provider as a single
stream (queue), specify an explicit nexthop for all domains that
transit that provider. Since you're already using an explicit
transport, it is easy to append the appropriate nexthop.
Any help would be very appreciated.
Ideally, you will not dismiss help when it is given.
- Rafael Azevedo - IAGENTE:
> > When all greetings fail with 4xx or whatever then Postfix willNo it doesn't. Postfix logs "delivery temporarily suspended" and
> > suspend deliveries.
> I have no idea about what I'm doing wrong, this really doesn't
> happen in my servers.
skips Yahoo until the "dead host" timer expires.