[plug] This Mailing list
summer at OS2.ami.com.au
Thu Jan 27 15:53:36 WST 2000
> John Summerfield wrote:
> > Highly improbable; if sendmail were that bad, nobody at all would use it.
> > However, sendmail is, if not the most-used MTA, then close to it. Plug's
> > list is hardly a high-activity one.
> I've heard it often repeated that sendmail doesn't work well with large
> lists. Of course, that's just me listening to hearsay again (and the
> fact that most of the large lists I'm on use either Postfix or qmail or
> a combination of the two).
> As for your reasoning that "if sendmail were that bad, nobody at all
> would use it", how do you explain Windows? Clearly this reasoning is
> flawed. Numerous poor products become so well-entrenched before people
> realise their shortcomings that it is difficult to change. sendmail's
> broad installed base is something of an example, although of course
> there are better ones.
This is wandering from the point, but I'd have thought Windows is merely
Despite your concerns, sendmail is indeed capable of handling large
volumes of mail; I recall do not imagine that the difference to the plug
list is readily discernable, and that's the point of what I said.
All my incoming mail (and it's considerably more the the PLUG list) goes
through a 486. The same 486 also serves up my web pages, collects info
from the Internet with java and Perl and handles most of my incoming ftp.
The only problem I have is that my Java programs tend to run out of
memory; sendmail's load is insignificant - probably the least of the
applications running on the system.
To be sure outgoing mail is more demanding, but there's heaps of power to
http://os2.ami.com.au/os2/ for OS/2 support.
Configuration, networking, combined IBM ftpsites index.
More information about the plug