Re: newbie question

• To: djb-qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Subject: Re: newbie question
• From: Russell Nelson <nelson@xxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 03:54:56 +0000
• Delivered-to: mailing list djb-qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• Delivered-to: djb-qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
• In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.3.96.970604170702.1800B-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Mailing-List: contact djb-qmail-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
• References: <Pine.GSO.3.96.970604170702.1800B-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

hilljere writes:
 > I am looking into using qmail for a large listserv operation.  If I
 > understand qmail correctly, it opens a seperate SMTP connection for each
 > message.  But on my listserv, about 60-70% of the users are on the same
 > mail server, so it seems like it would be more efficient to keep the
 > connections open instead of closing and reopening them for every message.
 > Is this an option with qmail, or is it better just to let qmail open
 > a hundred (or whatever # I choose) connections at once to deliver the
 > mail?

No, it's not an option -- not with standard deliveries with qmail.
You can use serialmail to deliver mail to your 60-70% host, and it
will deliver using a single TCP session.

Some people have a problem with concurrent deliveries, saying that the
TCP protocol isn't designed for multiple concurrent connections.  This
is not true, however.  It's the TCP implementations that don't share
information about multiple connections between the same pair of
hosts.  But rather than damn the implementations, they damn qmail.  Oh
well.

-- 
-russ <nelson@xxxxxxxxxx>    http://www.crynwr.com/~nelson
Crynwr Software sells network driver support    | PGP ok
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | Justice in the economy means
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | oppression by the government

• newbie question
• From: hilljere <hilljere@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

• Prev: Re: newbie question
• Next: Re: Domainaliases - not just virtualdomains
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread