[Fwd: Re: ms Exchange alternative (Dovecot)]

Frank Shute frank at esperance-linux.co.uk
Fri Jan 30 20:18:40 GMT 2004


On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 08:57:56AM +0000, Martin Hepworth wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Maybe a greater part of the slowness problem is Sendmail. I ran Qmail
> >on a 486 with < 8 Mb & there were no slowness problems. BTW, Qmail is
> >still on the same release it was some 5 yrs ago hence it hasn't
> >suffered from bloat since. I don't know if the same can be said of
> >Sendmail.
> >
> 
> an alternative maybe exim, which is much faster than sendmail, but is 
> still runs around 4MB of 'size' in top..prob around the same size once 
> you've added up all the qmail daemon and the multiple exim's that run 
> using shared resources.
> 

My primary gripe about Sendmail (and Exim) is that they are large
single binaries.

I was taught that when developing software you should try and avoid
that as much as possible as it makes it difficult to white/black box
test your software. A more desirable setup is to break your
application up into a number of different processes and use IPC which
subsequently makes development easier and the subsequent application
less prone to error and security problems.

The number of problems found in Sendmail (and even Exim has had at
least one exploit fairly recently) as compared to Qmail (none in 5+
yrs) seems to bear this out.

Have I been taught wrongly? Perhaps others with experience of
developing complex pieces of software would care to comment.

I'm also rather surprised that an MTA hasn't been written in Java,
certainly no popular ones AFAIK. Is it just that it's considered too
slow still?

-- 

 Frank 

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
   Boroughbridge.
 Tel: 01423 323019
     ---------
PGP keyID: 0xC0B341A3
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

http://www.esperance-linux.co.uk/





More information about the Ukfreebsd mailing list