|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Subject: Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance...
From: Brad Knowles (blk
skynet.be)Date: Sun Mar 05 2000 - 14:25:42 CST
- Next message: Wietse Venema: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- Previous message: sthaug
nethelp.no: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- In reply to: Justin Robertson: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- Next in thread: Dylan Griffiths: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- Reply: Brad Knowles: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
At 10:22 AM -0800 2000/3/5, Justin Robertson wrote:
> Prehaps you'd like to tell me why sendmail outperformed postfix on the
> SCSI machine then? hmm?
Sounds to me like a configuration problem with postfix.
-- These are my opinions and should not be taken as official Skynet policy ========================================================================= Brad Knowles, <blkskynet.be> Sys. Arch., Mail/News/FTP/Proxy Admin
Note: No Microsoft programs were used in the creation or distribution of this message. If you are using a Microsoft program to view this message, be forewarned that I am not responsible for any harm you may encounter as a result.
See <http://i-want-a-website.com/about-microsoft/twelve-step.html> for details.
- Next message: Wietse Venema: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- Previous message: sthaug
nethelp.no: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- In reply to: Justin Robertson: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- Next in thread: Dylan Griffiths: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- Reply: Brad Knowles: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]