<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Benchmarking Mail Relays and Forwarders</title>
	<atom:link href="http://doc.coker.com.au/papers/benchmarking-mail-relays-and-forwarders/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://doc.coker.com.au/papers/benchmarking-mail-relays-and-forwarders/</link>
	<description>Documents that are not date based</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Jan 2011 18:04:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Icann</title>
		<link>http://doc.coker.com.au/papers/benchmarking-mail-relays-and-forwarders/comment-page-1/#comment-1685</link>
		<dc:creator>Icann</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2010 00:20:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://doc.coker.com.au/?p=27#comment-1685</guid>
		<description>his means outbound smart host gateway systems, list servers, and forwarding services.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>his means outbound smart host gateway systems, list servers, and forwarding services.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: etbe</title>
		<link>http://doc.coker.com.au/papers/benchmarking-mail-relays-and-forwarders/comment-page-1/#comment-359</link>
		<dc:creator>etbe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 06:22:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://doc.coker.com.au/?p=27#comment-359</guid>
		<description>http://etbe.coker.com.au/
Rob: I will write about some other Postal tests at my main blog (see the above URL).

The test was not contrived to abuse DNS, it was designed to simulate one aspect of mailing list performance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://etbe.coker.com.au/" rel="nofollow">http://etbe.coker.com.au/</a><br />
Rob: I will write about some other Postal tests at my main blog (see the above URL).</p>
<p>The test was not contrived to abuse DNS, it was designed to simulate one aspect of mailing list performance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob</title>
		<link>http://doc.coker.com.au/papers/benchmarking-mail-relays-and-forwarders/comment-page-1/#comment-358</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:01:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://doc.coker.com.au/?p=27#comment-358</guid>
		<description>This test seems contrived specifically to abuse DNS and test alias expansion performance, while avoiding the huge performance bottleneck of the queue process.  In order to follow RFC, every file written to the queue is opened O_SYNC and brings with it horrible write performance.  Try a 1:1 or a 1:3 relay test and watch performance tank.


No message store delivery numbers?  :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This test seems contrived specifically to abuse DNS and test alias expansion performance, while avoiding the huge performance bottleneck of the queue process.  In order to follow RFC, every file written to the queue is opened O_SYNC and brings with it horrible write performance.  Try a 1:1 or a 1:3 relay test and watch performance tank.</p>
<p>No message store delivery numbers?  :-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

