Re: Newbie: Slow scheduling?

[Dani Pardo <dani@minerva.enpl.es>]

On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Matti Aarnio wrote:

> >  Hi, I'm using Zmailer 2.99.50-s19, and everything seems to work, but I've
> > noticed that it's a bit slow:
> >
> > Jun 29 09:36:00 calix router[2257]: S.rS5RM104048:
> >	from=<dani@calix.enpl.es>, rrelay=dani@localhost size=327, nrcpts=1,
> >	msgid=<19990629093552.A2361@calix.enpl.es>
> > Jun 29 09:36:10 calix mailbox[2367]: S.rS5RM104048: to=<dani>,
> >	delay=00:00:18, xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=local, stat=ok3 Ok
> > 
> 
> 	Yes and no.  Sendmail is monolithic program doing all by itself
> 	from message submission to driving the final delivery.
> 	Thus sendmail is fast for doing its job, but on the other hand,
> 	when there is *lots of* separate emails to deliver, you can all
> 	the sudden have lots of running 'sendmail' processes, and then
> 	your system load skyrockets without limits...
> 

  Mm.. it's true.. :) I've tried this perl script:

 #!/usr/bin/perl -w
 
  for($counter=0;$counter<500;$counter++)
  {
   open  MAIL, "|mail dani";
   print MAIL "Hi!";
   close MAIL
  }

  If I run it under the Ultra-1 and sendmail, it never ends.. because it
keeps delivering them one by one and doing all the job.
  From the Pentium Pro running ZMailer, I can set counter to 5000, and
have all them delivered in 2 or 3 minutes.
  So for each message, the delay is higher in zmailer, but the speed  (in
messages per second) under ZMailer is *much* faster.
  I've done it all locally -no network- and just one smtp conection at
time. I guess that if I had many simultaneous conections, the results
would be even more impressive :)
  Thanks for the info, It has been very helpful.
  Keep on the good job,

---
Dani Pardo, dani@enpl.es
Enplater S.A


PS: I think I'll forgive all that R$*<@$%y>$* $#ether $@$2 $:$1<@$2>$3 :-)