Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 24 Oct 1995 14:58:55 -0400 (EDT)
From:      "Jonathan M. Bresler" <jmb@kryten.Atinc.COM>
To:        Gary Palmer <gary@palmer.demon.co.uk>
Cc:        chat@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: moving some mail. 
Message-ID:  <Pine.3.89.9510241415.K8705-0100000@kryten.atinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <3442.814543729@palmer.demon.co.uk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 24 Oct 1995, Gary Palmer wrote:

> "Jonathan M. Bresler" stands accused of writing in message ID
> <Pine.3.89.9510232246.E7857-0100000@kryten.atinc.com>:
> >over the last two day and a half days we have AVERAGED 3.31 kBytes of 
> >mail per SECOND.  outbound ONLY.  
> 
> What isn't so impressive is those same figures only translate into
> 1.601 messages/second. Which means that each message has an average
> size of 2.07k.

	yeah....headers and all that. some mail contains little added 
information and a lot of quoted text that does not help at all.  (hey!  
who you looking at! ;)

> (call me picky, but I'd start cheering at 2-3 mails/second - 1.6
>  doesn't sound all that impressive, despite the fact that it probably
>  is)

	the faster the better.  puts a new prespective on the number of 
sendmail processes running.  each one has to wait for the other end to do 
its thing.  so maybe 30-50 sendmail processes sitting on a wait channel 
aint that bad after all, they dont complete for kernel resources and 
context switches when on a wait channel (right?).   given 30 sendmails 
and 1.6 messages/sec either each one waits about 20 seconds average or 
we are in deep trouble regarding context switching...not!

> >mind now that the queue is a little backed up with 2000+ messages.  
> >half of those are due to 2 sites which are having difficulties....grrrrr!
> 
> Urk. And I bet one of them is *.demon.co.uk? Apart from changing their
> routing setup (and running into problems with the version of gated
> they use, causing nasty routing failures over the past few days),

	bingo!  that's 1 for 1, care to guess the other?

> >i thnk we need to got to 64bit counters in the networking code....the 
> >data is moving so fast that its gone negative.
> 
> Part of the problem possibly is that the counters (or most of them
> anyhow) are (AFAIR) unsigned, but I seem to remember netstat prints
> (some of) them as signed...

	oh, bother!

Jonathan M. Bresler  jmb@kryten.atinc.com       | Analysis & Technology, Inc.  
FreeBSD Postmaster   jmb@FreeBSD.Org            | 2341 Jeff Davis Hwy
play go.                                        | Arlington, VA 22202
ride bike. hack FreeBSD.--ah the good life      | 703-418-2800 x346




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.3.89.9510241415.K8705-0100000>