Sumit Malhotra

Hi Chuck,

Thanks for response.

I already have queue groups. but i am not using it for the
prioritizing based on the fallback MX or slow response. It's sort of
random. Can we achieve the same with queugroups (in any way ???)

I will not prefer the OS upgrade or change of harddisk to the
spindles.

regards,
Sumit

Chuck Yerkes <Newsboy@Jan2004.NOSPAMsnew.com> wrote in message news:<mSqNb.69862$8H.111225@attbi_s03>...
> Sumit Malhotra wrote:
> > Thanks for the quick responses.
> > I have already started tweaking the sednmail configuration with
> > timeouts.
> >
> > In addition to the above , as all mentioned, the problem could be in
> > disk I/O or with options while mounting the filesystem where queue
> > resides.
> >
> > But i have SunOS 2.6(Apoligies for writing solaris 7 previously)
> > which doesn't have the logging and noatime options available.
> >
> > Is there ay other way of achieving the same ?
>
> Hmmm, thought noatime was really old (sunos 4 or 3 even).
>
> Be careful on timeouts, you may not want to lower some of them much.
>
> That said, for volume SENDING, I've tighten the timeouts on the main
> machine - and using a fallbackMX to get it to another machine if I
> can't send it out quickly from the main machine.
>
> (layers of FallBacks can be used in a bucket brigade. I was
> sorry this never made it into queuegroups (if > 1 day, move it to
> "slowmail" queuegroup).
>
>
> Multiple queue directories will help immediately.
> 1) If you're not running 8.10+, then do (8.11.$last or 8.12).
> 2) if you can get more SPINDLES involved (2GB disks are fine),
> then do so.
>
> making your queue dirs (or queuegroups which have MANY advantages)
> /var/spool/mqueue/q*
>
> and having /var/spool/mqueue/q01 /var/spool/mqueue/q02
> /var/spool/mqueueq03, etc. you keep number of files/queue lower.
>
> I'd written this up on sendmail.net but the site seems to be gone
> (replace with sendmail.com).
>
>
> VERY important with UFS/FFS file systems (sunos - all).
>
> okay, now you have more disks. Mount it under /mq/disk1 (for example).
>
> /var/spool/mqueue/q03 is a sym link to /mq/disk1/q03/.
>
>
> We can play games that underneath where ..../q03/xf .../q03/qf
> .../q03/df are directories.
>
> Fancy, you make them each links to a separate spindle.
> That way when writes are happening, they use multiple disks.
>
> Nick, afair, has a good writeup on that.
>
> I make xf/ subdirectories actually point to a memory file system.
> Locks don't survive reboots.
> /var/spool/mqueue/MFS/q01-xf
> /var/spool/mqueue/MFS/q02-xf
>
> etc. MFS is fast :)
>
>
> You'll benefit from a platform upgrade. New OS (solaris 9 or perhaps
> BSD) or just an Intel box.
>
> Often people run mirroring on Suns for robustness. On Sun disks, which
> are usually slow (eg. not 10,000 RPM or 15,000 RPM (preferred)).
>
> Mail is *ALL* about I/O. Give me a 500MHz CPU and really fast disk
> and I'll do better than a 4-way box with crappy disk.
>
> Solaris 2.6. 1997? '96? Solid. Liked it more than 2.7. But 2.7
> is pretty old too ('98 or '99).
>
>
> queue groups can be REALLY REALLY helpful in separating mail.
>
> I shove mail FROM daemon/root/other 'bounce' type things into
> a queuegroup with 20 directories.
>
> I compiled it with FFR_QUEUERETURN_DSN so I can bounce DSN's in less
> than 5 days.
>
> Inbound mail hits one queuegroup, outbound another.
>
> My main outbound machine, when I arrived, was usually 20,000 messages
> in 1 queue (40,000 files in a dir on Sun takes 5-6 minutes just to run
> 'ls'.
>
> It's now got ~5000-10000 queued messages 30 directories. It's a bit
> faster :) (most of those are spam bounces).
>
>
> That's my second long answer. two is my limit for free advice.