From: Victor Duchovni (Victor.Duchovnimorganstanley.com)
Date: Fri Mar 20 2009 - 12:36:26 CDT

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 01:32:26PM -0400, Brandon Hilkert wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Victor Duchovni"
> <Victor.Duchovnimorganstanley.com>
> To: <postfix-userspostfix.org>
> Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 1:20 PM
> Subject: Re: Performance tuning
>
>
>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 01:01:55PM -0400, Brandon Hilkert wrote:
>>
>>> I've been running everything from scripts, hoping to zero in on the
>>> bottleneck.
>>
>> How many messages are you sending in parallel in the injector scripts?
>
> My local script on the postfix machine itself. It's just a single shell
> script in a for loop.
>
> Is there a better way to test?

Yes, of course. Run multiple copies of your script if it
generates particularly representative (of your intended work-load)
content. Otherwise use smtp-source(1) with a suitable number of parallel
streams.

Measurements of single-stream performance just measure single transaction
latency on a lightly loaded server, not peak server throughput.

--
        Viktor.

Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header.

To unsubscribe from the postfix-users list, visit
http://www.postfix.org/lists.html or click the link below:
<mailto:majordomopostfix.org?body=unsubscribe%20postfix-users>

If my response solves your problem, the best way to thank me is to not
send an "it worked, thanks" follow-up. If you must respond, please put
"It worked, thanks" in the "Subject" so I can delete these quickly.

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]