On Fri, Oct 22, 1999 at 04:44:07AM -0700, Richard G. Duvall wrote:
qmail is another MTA, a replacement for sendmail. I don't want to get
flamed on this list, so I won't say any more about it. You can find out
more about it on:
http://www.qmail.org
Because it can write to Maildirs, it comes with its own POP server
that supports Maildirs. It is definitely not the same as qpopper.
I gave up on qpopper a loooong time ago. It was causing intense
disk IO on my server, client sessions would often fail because of
stale locks. To be fair to it, I even tried to recompile it in
SERVER_MODE, where it doesn't copy the mail spool to a different
file. That was even worse - it led to corruption of the mailboxes.
I have even tried cucipop, but it was a pain to read its code, and
having worked with the modular qmail-popup/qmail-pop3d system, I
couldn't bring myself to use anything else.
> Well, that's great! we are currenty running qpopper, but it runs REALLY
> slow on a RAID 5 system with 256MB RAM, and 450Mhz pentium-II. We have
> 9,000 customers, and customers are complaining. Also, their mail often
> won't unlock with qpopper. so, I am trying to move away from qpopper.
> qpopper to me just looks like a program with alot of bells and whistles.
> Kind of like a microsoft office program. The newer the program, the more
> bells and whistles it has, but the slower it runs, and the more often it
> hangs your system.
>
> Only reason I choose cucipop is because I tried it without the v-pop and
> it ran VERY fast. Disk IO was down to a minimum... Disk IO is our
> biggest problem. But, it would be nice to address both issues.
--
See complete headers for more info
