[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

qmail or postfix? (was: RE: What is the best mailling list manager for qmail and Domain Tech. Control ?)



I am in the process of choosing between postfix and qmail for our mail relays. I've not decided yet. However, I am surprised by the fact that many people who prefer postfix, also enjoy posting unqualified[0] statements[1][2][3] about qmail.

If anyone have properly grounded views, please share!

For example, I'd like comments on
http://homepages.tesco.net/~J.deBoynePollard/Reviews/UnixMTSes/postfix.html
and 
http://homepages.tesco.net/~J.deBoynePollard/Reviews/UnixMTSes/qmail.html



[0] A _qualified_ statement would e.g. be "qmail is trivially DoS'ed by sending emails with no subject at a rate of 2 per second". Typical unqualified statements are shown below.

[1] Michael Loftis wrote (about qmail):
> First is, unless they've made design changes, 
> it's trivial to DoS.

Really? How would you DoS qmail? Could the same attack be used to DoS postfix?

[2] Michael Loftis also wrote (about qmail):
> Second, it doesn't scale so well, but unless
> you're talking upwards of about 3-5k/msgs/hr
> you might not run into it.

Really? Quoting Bernstein quoting Bill Weinman (cr.yp.to/qmail/users.html):
"Our busiest list is about 250 messages X 1800 subscribers 
(avg mail deliveries: 450,000 transactions per day). Sendmail
was barfing badly on this, and qmail seems to be doing real
well. The machine is a Pentium 90 running Linux 2.0.13 with
64Mb of RAM. I have the spawn limit set at 100. I am *very*
impressed."

How was the qmail that didn't scale well configured? On what hardware?

[3] Craig Sanders wrote:
> ps: qmail is a bad idea.  postfix is better.

Your conclusion may be right, but the arguments are missing. Would you please share?


Thanks,

:) Bjornar



Reply to: