From: Ralf Hildebrandt (no email)
Date: Fri Mar 01 2002 - 15:13:59 EST
On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 03:10:09PM -0500, Mark Jeftovic wrote:
> This is certainly good information. My problem would be minimizing the
> increased overhead. If there was a way to conditionally route via
> the filter, based on sender address then we're fine but that brings us
> back to sender based routing which is not what postfix is all
> about, as you point out.
>
> If we have to route all email through it we'll have to take a long
> hard look and see if the extra overhead is too much or not.
It depends. If you write it in C, it can be made small and fast and
wouldn't have too much of an impact.
> Increasing overhead by a factor of four (as per the first example
> in the FILTER_README) is probably not viable, given our volume. The
> latter option, maybe. I'd have to play with it and decide if its
> worth it. Maybe having it in place and able to be turned on and
> off during periods that required it would be satisfactory.
With a decent filter, each mail passes the system twice (once when it
comes in, then it's filtered and then it goes into postfix agein for
final delivery).
How much mail do you have to handle per day?
-- Ralf Hildebrandt (Im Auftrag des Referat V A) Charite Campus Virchow-Klinikum Tel. +49 (0)30-450 570-155 Referat V A - Kommunikationsnetze - Fax. +49 (0)30-450 570-916 Why you can't find your system administrators: Wandering around the halls looking for his/her lost sanity. - To unsubscribe, send mail to with content (not subject): unsubscribe postfix-users
|
|
|