From owner-freebsd-isp Mon Sep 8 06:46:57 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id GAA02358 for isp-outgoing; Mon, 8 Sep 1997 06:46:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mojo.calyx.net (qmailr@mojo.calyx.net [208.132.136.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id GAA02352 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 1997 06:46:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 2921 invoked from network); 8 Sep 1997 13:46:47 -0000 Received: from kwesi.calyx.net (208.132.136.100) by mojo.calyx.net with SMTP; 8 Sep 1997 13:46:47 -0000 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19970908093731.03659340@calyx.net> X-Sender: nick@calyx.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 09:37:31 -0400 To: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG From: Nicholas Merrill Subject: Re: qmail v. sendmail In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.3.32.19970906155223.0069ff38@bulloch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk At 07:26 PM 9/7/97 -0700, Michael Dillon wrote: >> My question: does anyone out there have any input on qmail? I >>am considering dumping Sendmail for qmail > >Oh my God! Expectations are dropping lower by the minute. Qmail is great >stuff, in fact I run qmail for our inhouse company mail here, but it is the >worst mailer to use for a mailing list machine. Try zmailer instead if >performance is what you want. I have been running Qmail on my mailing list server since around May with no major snags. For a list processor I am running ListProc 6.0c by Anastasios Kotsikonas. I don't understand why you say that qmail is the worst mailer for use on a mailing list machine. It works great for us! When a message comes in for one of the bigger lists (over 3000 subscribers) it doesn't choke the machine, and in fact it can still do lots of other tasks in the background, like serving web pages etc. Granted the machine I'm running it on is a Pentium 100mHz, not a 486 but I don't see why he shouldn't run qmail on his listserver anyway. Could you back up that statement with some facts Mike? Nick