I am using qpopper, the Qualcom one. Though, i don't think I am spelling
qualcom correctly, but you get the idea, I am sure. Do I need to change
to a different one that will do what I need it to do?
Sincerely,
Richard G. Duvall
On Fri, 20 Aug 1999, me wrote:
> What pop server are you using.
>
> Iqbal
>
> Richard G. Duvall wrote:
> >
> > I do have this sort of setup (where mail is being delivered to /var/mail
> > for every user). I did split off the spool to a seperate drive, and that
> > helped ALOT! I have root filesystem on same drive as /var/mail.
> >
> > I am thinking of doing the following configuration:
> >
> > 1 wide scsi drive for root filesystem
> > 1 wide scsi drive for spool
> > 2 wide scsi drives striped together, mirrored with 2 other drives which
> > are striped together.
> >
> > Total of 6 wide scsi drives. spooling doesn't take that much room, but I
> > need speed for spooling. But, most of my speed problems are taking place
> > when people are checking mail, not sending, (unless they are sending to a
> > user on our system, then it get's queued for later delivery, because it
> > times out).
> >
> > This configuration will give us not only redundancy, but more speed
> > because of the striping, and use of wide scsi, as opposed to narrow on the
> > same drive as the root filesystem as we have it set up now.
> >
> > I didn't know about the hierarchy thing in UNIX. I will give that a try.
> >
> > Is there anybody on this mailing list that can confirm that this hierarchy
> > thing does make a definite difference in speed on BSDI4.01?
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Richard G. Duvall
> >
> > On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, David Sheryn wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Tabor J. Wells wrote:
> > >
> > > [ ... ]
> > >
> > > > > My hard drive on my mail server is doing alot of access (slow seek time,
> > > > > etc). I have 10,000 users on the 400Mhz Pentium II with 128MB ram. I am
> > > > > wondering if my access is being slowed down by mail transfer, or from
> > > > > swapping. how do I tell which?
> > >
> > > [ ... ]
> > >
> > > > Also I don't know how your disks are laid out, but I would strongly
> > > > recommend putting I/O intensive directories (like your mail spool perhaps)
> > > > and filesystems on their own disk.
> > >
> > > If you have a single /var/mail (or whatever) with 10,000 mailboxes in it, then
> > > this may also be your problem. Unix directories don't scale well to this sort
> > > of size. You may want to consider splitting the mailboxes accross a directory
> > > hierarchy e.g. /var/mail/A/B/login where A and B are different for succesive
> > > login names. Exim has a string expansion function, hash, which may be useful
> > > for deriving these from the login name.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > DHS
> > > -- David Sheryn <D.H.Sheryn@???> Postmaster, Computing Services
> > > -- City University, Northampton Square, London, EC1V 0HB
> > > -- Phone: (+44) 171 477 8000 Direct 0171 477 8196 Fax: 0171 477 8565
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
> > >
> >
> > --
> > ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
>
