The mailing list for listmasters using Sympa

[David Verdin <address@concealed>]

Woops.

I missed Soji's answer...

Well, er...

"Like he says!"

Cheers,

David

Le 15/07/16 à 05:42, IKEDA Soji a écrit :

Adam and folks,

On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 14:20:33 -0700
"Adam Bernstein" (via sympa-users Mailing List) <address@concealed> wrote:

Quick question for the Sympa folks, unless anyone else has gotten this 
working:

Largely in response to the exact slowdown mentioned below when enabling 
the merge_feature, we're working on spreading the sending load over more 
servers. The only document I can find is this one:
   http://www.sympa.org/manual/server_architecture_for_big_services

It's rather old, but still I think mostly relevant, and I'm thinking 
that moving bulk.pl onto a different server is most likely our best 
option. (We could just split the MTA by using relay hosts, but I'd 
rather go further.) And I want to confirm one thing: We can run bulk.pl 
at the same time on *multiple* servers, yes? There won't be any 
contention or locking issues or duplicated sends or anything?

Theoretically yes.  Why I say "theoretically" is that I have not
heard of any cases on production systems.  It may not necessarily
mean "no".


Sympa 6.0 and 6.1 used spools based on database tables.  Exclusive
processing over multiple processes or servers was intended to be
guaranteed by lock fields in central database.

However, (in my understanding) it turned out that overhead by
database access and query execution can make operations very
inefficient, even on single server.

Sympa 6.2 introduced spools based on filesystem: Spools shared by
NAS / SAN were supposed.  Exclusive processing was intended to be
guaranteed by file locking thanks to File::NFSLock module.  It
satisfactorily works at least on single server with multiple
processes.

However, availability beyond single server has not been proven based
on certain evidence.


In short, it is worth trying on clustering with Sympa 6.2 and shared
spool.  I look forward the good news :-).


Regards,

-- Soji

I believe the fact that multiple bulk.pl child processes can run on the 
same server means the answer is yes, but just want to be sure.

Thanks!
         adam

On 7/13/2016 1:44 PM, Steve Rich wrote:

We implemented this and I regret it almost daily.  The first problem we
encountered was what Steve mentioned with ESPs checking links and auto
unsubscribing so I wrote an interstitial custom action that prevented
auto unsubscribes by link checking.  Secondly, delivery performance took
a nose dive as a result of not being able to bundle recipients of the
same domain.  My problems went from "where is my unsubscribe link" to
"why do I have to click so many times" and "why is my email delayed".

Thanks,
Steve

-- 
Electric Embers Cooperative
Handcrafted hosting, powering the fires of change
electricembers.coop
(800) 843-6197 / (415) 992-6916

--
A bug in Sympa? Quick! To the bug tracker!

David Verdin Études et projets applicatifs
Tél : +33 2 23 23 69 71 Fax : +33 2 23 23 71 21   www.renater.fr	RENATER 263 Avenue du Gal Leclerc 35042 Rennes Cedex

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: Signature cryptographique S/MIME