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

Re: performance of postfix

Expand Messages
  • Stan Hoeppner
    ... The only point I was making is that some of the logwatch summary values may not be accurate, providing him a heads up as he had apparently never used
    Message 1 of 9 , May 22 11:35 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      On 5/22/2013 4:04 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
      > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 03:00:44PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
      >
      >>> You'll probably find occasional
      >>> latency sending messages through the content filter. If that's a
      >>> problem, tune the content filter to remove DNS lookups or raise
      >>> its concurrency. If the content filter is using all available CPU
      >>> resources, tune it to do less, or find a more efficient one.
      >>>
      >>> Before any of that, locate the log entries showing delayed deliveries,
      >>> read them, and figure out the reasons for the delay.
      >>
      >> I'm using spamc/spamd via pipe so it doesn't add to delays in postfix/local log stamps. To see the spamd delays I use:
      >>
      >> ~$ grep scantime /var/log/mail.log|mawk '{ print($12) }'|cut -f1 -d,
      >
      > When the scanner throughput is too low, the delay shows up in the
      > active queue of the pre-scan Postfix instance, not in the scanner
      > time to scan a message logs. Messages sitting in active wating to
      > be scheduled for scanning are not seen by the non-telepathic scanner.

      The only point I was making is that some of the logwatch summary values
      may not be accurate, providing him a heads up as he had apparently never
      used logwatch prior to installing it and posting his summary table. I
      was not attempting to troubleshoot his larger issue in this post.

      --
      Stan
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.