I'm running sendmail on a Solaris 8 system with 2 CPU's 2 Gig RAM etc. I can't get sendmail to accept more that 10 e-mails per second ? I've tried to tune a lot of stuff in the sendmail config file, but nothing helped.
I installed smtpd on the machine and I can get 5500 emails per minute.
I've tried using sendmail to only deliver mail too and that also crawls along only at 10/s.
Is there anything else I can tweak or some compile options ?
On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, Reinier Bezuidenhout wrote: > I'm running sendmail on a Solaris 8 system with 2 CPU's 2 Gig RAM etc. I > can't get sendmail to accept more that 10 e-mails per second ? I've tried > to tune a lot of stuff in the sendmail config file, but nothing helped.
WHat disk sub system are you using?
> I installed smtpd on the machine and I can get 5500 emails per minute.
I've not heard of that one. Presumably, it's a lot more light weight than sendmail.
Reinier Bezuidenhout wrote: > I'm running sendmail on a Solaris 8 system with 2 CPU's 2 Gig RAM etc. I > can't get sendmail to accept more that 10 e-mails per second ? I've tried > to tune a lot of stuff in the sendmail config file, but nothing helped.
What do you mean by "accept"? Where does the mail go after sendmail accepted it?
> I installed smtpd on the machine and I can get 5500 emails per minute.
Nice. I did 10000 email per minute on an E450 (relaying) with 8.12 in my performance tests. You need a fast disk for that (or turn off fsync(): does smtpd uses that?)
-- If you feel the urgent wish to send me a courtesy copy of a Usenet posting, then make sure it's recognizable as such! The FAQ: http://www.sendmail.org/faq/ Before you ask.
> > I'm running sendmail on a Solaris 8 system with 2 CPU's 2 Gig RAM etc. I > > can't get sendmail to accept more that 10 e-mails per second ? I've tried > > to tune a lot of stuff in the sendmail config file, but nothing helped.
> What do you mean by "accept"? Where does the mail go after sendmail > accepted it?
> > I installed smtpd on the machine and I can get 5500 emails per minute.
> Nice. I did 10000 email per minute on an E450 (relaying) with 8.12 > in my performance tests. You need a fast disk for that (or turn > off fsync(): does smtpd uses that?)
> -- > If you feel the urgent wish to send me a courtesy copy of a Usenet > posting, then make sure it's recognizable as such! > The FAQ: http://www.sendmail.org/faq/ Before you ask.
> IF you turn of fsync, would that possibly cause mails to be lost in case of > a system crash ? Is it safe for the file system ?
Yes. No. But some "MTA"s do that anyway to achieve high throughput.
> I'll get the specs on the machine ....
You didn't answer any of my questions:
> "Claus Aßmann" wrote: > > What do you mean by "accept"? Where does the mail go after sendmail > > accepted it? > > Nice. I did 10000 email per minute on an E450 (relaying) with 8.12 > > in my performance tests. You need a fast disk for that (or turn > > off fsync(): does smtpd uses that?)
It's hard to tell what's going on if you don't provide more data.
-- If you feel the urgent wish to send me a courtesy copy of a Usenet posting, then make sure it's recognizable as such! The FAQ: http://www.sendmail.org/faq/ Before you ask.
>I'm running sendmail on a Solaris 8 system with 2 CPU's 2 Gig RAM etc. I >can't get sendmail to accept more that 10 e-mails per second ? I've tried >to tune a lot of stuff in the sendmail config file, but nothing helped. ... >Is there anything else I can tweak or some compile options ?
Including the .mc file you used to generate your .cf would be nice (you did tune using the .mc, didn't you?). This would reduce a lot of guessing about your configuration.
As a specific example, have you set ident timeout (confTO_IDENT) to zero?
What kind of CPU load do you see on the machine when you're getting that 10 msgs/s? I'd assume the system is running pretty much idle at that time - and I wouldn't expect a disk bottleneck either. -- Wolf a.k.a. Juha Laiho Espoo, Finland (GC 3.0) GIT d- s+: a C++ ULSH++++$ P++@ L+++ E- W+$@ N++ !K w !O !M V PS(+) PE Y+ PGP(+) t- 5 !X R !tv b+ !DI D G e+ h---- r+++ y++++ "...cancel my subscription to the resurrection!" (Jim Morrison)
1) accept: I mean receive the e-mail and put it in the queue (sendmail configured to only queue) 2) After sendmail has received the mail, it delivers it via LMTP to a local (on the machine) application. 3) smtpd does not use fsync(), but I also turned it off in sendmail with the SuperSafe=0 option, it still was slow. 4) I've ruled out the disk as being slow since I can get smtpd to receive (write into a queue) 5500 e-mails per minute.
I know that sendmail on solaris 5.8 uses fcntl to lock files rather than flock, might that be the reason ?
> > IF you turn of fsync, would that possibly cause mails to be lost in case of > > a system crash ? Is it safe for the file system ?
> Yes. No. > But some "MTA"s do that anyway to achieve high throughput.
> > I'll get the specs on the machine ....
> You didn't answer any of my questions:
> > "Claus Aßmann" wrote:
> > > What do you mean by "accept"? Where does the mail go after sendmail > > > accepted it?
> > > Nice. I did 10000 email per minute on an E450 (relaying) with 8.12 > > > in my performance tests. You need a fast disk for that (or turn > > > off fsync(): does smtpd uses that?)
> It's hard to tell what's going on if you don't provide more data.
> -- > If you feel the urgent wish to send me a courtesy copy of a Usenet > posting, then make sure it's recognizable as such! > The FAQ: http://www.sendmail.org/faq/ Before you ask.
Below is the .mc file I used to create the .cf file ...
I turned ident off in the .cf and I also tried SuperSafe=0 to disable fsync.
the load on the system is about 60% iowait and 30% idle ... the iowait, would that indicate a disk bottlenect or does it also list iowait if it waits on a socket ?
> "Reinier Bezuidenhout" <rbezu...@yahoo.com> said: > >I'm running sendmail on a Solaris 8 system with 2 CPU's 2 Gig RAM etc. I > >can't get sendmail to accept more that 10 e-mails per second ? I've tried > >to tune a lot of stuff in the sendmail config file, but nothing helped. > ... > >Is there anything else I can tweak or some compile options ?
> Including the .mc file you used to generate your .cf would be nice > (you did tune using the .mc, didn't you?). This would reduce a lot > of guessing about your configuration.
> As a specific example, have you set ident timeout (confTO_IDENT) to zero?
> What kind of CPU load do you see on the machine when you're getting > that 10 msgs/s? I'd assume the system is running pretty much idle > at that time - and I wouldn't expect a disk bottleneck either. > -- > Wolf a.k.a. Juha Laiho Espoo, Finland > (GC 3.0) GIT d- s+: a C++ ULSH++++$ P++@ L+++ E- W+$@ N++ !K w !O !M V > PS(+) PE Y+ PGP(+) t- 5 !X R !tv b+ !DI D G e+ h---- r+++ y++++ > "...cancel my subscription to the resurrection!" (Jim Morrison)
> 1) accept: I mean receive the e-mail and put it in the queue (sendmail > configured to only queue) > 2) After sendmail has received the mail, it delivers it via LMTP to a local > (on the machine) application.
So you perform queue runs?
> 3) smtpd does not use fsync(), but I also turned it off in sendmail with the > SuperSafe=0 option, it still was slow. > 4) I've ruled out the disk as being slow since I can get smtpd to receive > (write into a queue) 5500 e-mails per minute.
Yes, but without fsync(). What disk is this, which FS? The conventional Sun-FS with their SCSI disks is very slow for an MTA application.
If you want similar test conditions, then don't run the queue:
sendmail -bd -odd -O SuperSafe=Off
Run your test and compare. If that's sufficiently fast, try: sendmail -bd -odd sendmail -bd -odq and finally add local delivery back. I assume the last step is the "killer".
As long as you are comparing different things the results will be useless.
-- If you feel the urgent wish to send me a courtesy copy of a Usenet posting, then make sure it's recognizable as such! The FAQ: http://www.sendmail.org/faq/ Before you ask.
> sendmail -bd -odq > and finally add local delivery back. I assume the last > step is the "killer".
> As long as you are comparing different things the results > will be useless.
Not even with all the options I can get more thant about 10 e-mails / second. When doing a "netstat -an" there is no connections to DNS since I've disabled DNS lookups.
> -- > If you feel the urgent wish to send me a courtesy copy of a Usenet > posting, then make sure it's recognizable as such! > The FAQ: http://www.sendmail.org/faq/ Before you ask.
Reinier Bezuidenhout wrote: > "Claus Aßmann" > > Reinier Bezuidenhout wrote: > > Yes, but without fsync(). What disk is this, which FS? The > > conventional Sun-FS with their SCSI disks is very slow for an MTA > > application. > I'm sure it is Sun-FS with SCSI disks ... what other options do I have ?
My test machine had a Baydel (?) RAID system...
> > If you want similar test conditions, then don't run the queue: > > sendmail -bd -odd -O SuperSafe=Off > File size = 5728 > time,messages,data(K),errors,connections > 15:38,582,3496,0,119,0 ---> 582 e-mails / minute
Ok, I tried this on another Sun... their FS is extremely slow. Removing 1200 files takes 26 seconds... That's ridiculous. It seems meta-data operations are very expensive.
Seems you need to get a better FS... ask Sun. Don't they have something else to offer (LVM? Veritas?)
-- If you feel the urgent wish to send me a courtesy copy of a Usenet posting, then make sure it's recognizable as such! The FAQ: http://www.sendmail.org/faq/ Before you ask.
> Ok, I tried this on another Sun... their FS is extremely slow. > Removing 1200 files takes 26 seconds... That's ridiculous. > It seems meta-data operations are very expensive.
Rich Teer wrote: > On 26 Apr 2002, Claus Aßmann wrote: > > Ok, I tried this on another Sun... their FS is extremely slow. > > Removing 1200 files takes 26 seconds... That's ridiculous. > > It seems meta-data operations are very expensive. > UFS logging might help here.
Does Sun support a logging (journaling) FS?
If so, which man pages are relevant? I can't find it on my SunOS 5.8 box :-(
-- If you feel the urgent wish to send me a courtesy copy of a Usenet posting, then make sure it's recognizable as such! The FAQ: http://www.sendmail.org/faq/ Before you ask.
> > > Ok, I tried this on another Sun... their FS is extremely slow. > > > Removing 1200 files takes 26 seconds... That's ridiculous. > > > It seems meta-data operations are very expensive.
> > UFS logging might help here.
I enabled logging and noatime on the UFS and it tripled the throughput ... this is a start .. 28 / sec thanks !!!! :) (all smiles here)
> If so, which man pages are relevant? > I can't find it on my SunOS 5.8 box :-(
> -- > If you feel the urgent wish to send me a courtesy copy of a Usenet > posting, then make sure it's recognizable as such! > The FAQ: http://www.sendmail.org/faq/ Before you ask.
