Re: [cobalt-developers] Majordomo & capacity

[Jeff Lasman <jblists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Steve Werby wrote:

> bulk_mailer, tlb and a few others.  With large lists such programs can
> greatly increase performance.  And some MTAs and mailing list software
> programs have that functionality built in.  Not Majordomo and not sendmail,
> though.

...<snipped>...

> If this isn't Cobalt specific and of interest to other Cobalt users I don't
> know what is.  I have to assume the original poster is planning on hosting
> the list on a Cobalt server and not enough information has been shared to
> rule out Majordomo or another MLM installed on a Cobalt server.

Based on experiences with about 10,000 address on a RaQ3 a few years
ago, and the sendmail continually shutting down, personally, I'd say it
is.  However, we can leave it hear and let it play out.  I was simply
going to recommend a listmanager designed for large lists, but I was
going to recommend it offlist and recommend that it NOT be run on a RaQ,
since previous people who've tried it on RaQs have had problems with it;
I just didn't want to start another war over it on this list.

> > (And, just for general knowledge, you're going to need very specialized
> > hardware for decent results with large lists; certainly Sun Cobalt RaQs
> > and Qubes are NOT designed for optimized bulk email sending.)
> 
> I don't quite agree.  I agree that more RAM and a faster processor will
> help, but there is software that can be installed and optimized on Cobalt
> servers that will perform much better than Majordomo by itself on a virgin
> RaQ.  A lot depends on the list (monthly broadcast or high volume
> discussion?  all users within the same company or 100,000 different domains?
> etc...).  And of course, it depends on what else the box is being used for
> too.

Even if it's an announcement list, since no one's going to host 100,000
addresses on a Raq the number of users that are going to be off the box
is still substantial.  With 100,000 addresses, even with good
management, there's going to be a lot of bounces.  Imho, it's NOT a job
for the RaQ's implementation of sendmail.  Either the RaQ is going to be
set up to run another MTA in addition to or instead of (much harder)
sendmail, or the poster is going to end up with a specialized system.

It's okay to disagree with me, but from our actual experience, I'll
stick by my original statement.  And I'll refer any disagreements to the
majordomo list at greatcircle.com.

There's a lot of good experience there.

Jeff
-- 
Jeff Lasman <jblists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Linux and Cobalt/Sun/RaQ Consulting
nobaloney.net
P. O. Box 52672, Riverside, CA  92517
voice: (909) 778-9980  *  fax: (702) 548-9484