From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 24 02:17:46 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CAD316A4CE for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2004 02:17:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp-gw-cl-c.dmv.com (smtp-gw-cl-c.dmv.com [216.240.97.41]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D176443D1D for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2004 02:17:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sven@dmv.com) Received: from mail-gw-cl-b.dmv.com (mail-gw-cl-b.dmv.com [216.240.97.39]) i5O2HM9D013887 for ; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 22:17:22 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from sven@dmv.com) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (dogpound.dyndns.org [64.45.134.154]) by mail-gw-cl-b.dmv.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i5O2HLnq010940 for ; Wed, 23 Jun 2004 22:17:22 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from sven@dmv.com) Message-ID: <40DA39C8.4020804@dmv.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 22:17:44 -0400 From: Sven Willenberger User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7 (Windows/20040616) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <40D9A58E.2040703@ctseuro.com> <20040624014222.GB74718@meer.net> In-Reply-To: <20040624014222.GB74718@meer.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.39 Subject: Re: 5.2.1 with 40000 virus scanned mails / day on Dellhardware?(Hardware suggestions) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 02:17:46 -0000 Joe Rhett wrote: >>Has anybody experience with Dell servers which runs under FreeBSD. I >>think about systems with Dual Xeon 3.0, 4 GB Ram and fast SCSI Hot Plug >>Raid 5 which should be strong enough to handle that amount of mails >>forwarding them to a Notes server. > > > I would use RAID 0+1 or just plain RAID 0 since these should be > cookie-cutter. > I agree that a basic RAID may be desirable. We have a series of dual Xeon 2.4GHz with 1-2Gig RAM processing maybe 1/2 million pieces of email a day. These machines in particular do spamassassin and run in parallel (6 machines behind a load balancer). During mail bombs the machines show signs of sweating under the perl load and there is the recurring issus of either softupdates causing backtraces or some other memory paging event causing them - again only under the severest of loads. We do not use a RAID solution on those so using a simple strip may help avoid the situation we are seeing (5.2.1-Release-P8). We also use FreeBSD on our primary MX machines (again a load-balanced series of 3 machines) and these are not running any perl processes - simply sendmail with extensive access lists. These machines run flawlessly and combined handle some 2 million+ emails a day. Sven