On 11/06/2021 22:14, Benny Pedersen wrote:

On 2021-06-11 12:42, Laura Steynes wrote:

...

so nobody

i am nobody then :)

it would be nice to see postconf -n, and doveconf -n

without this info its hard to help

but remember lda, ltmp is both signle recipient

where come clamav into the mix ?

off your drugs again benny? WTF should she provide all the config outputs, when she asked a simple question about one option, and WTF clamav came from is beyond me

i dont know much, but its important to provide info to get help

On Sun, Jun 6, 2021 at 12:03 PM Laura Steynes <laura.steynes72@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi, Although dovecot-lda serves us fine, we only average 8k messages an hour, peaking at 11k, over 4 machines (mostly for redundancy, we've run this fine on just 1 machine, but sometimes clamav makes things get upset, so we added some more especially since we are growing rapidly, we decided to see if lmtp would be of benefit, so far, we cant tell any difference, I guess it is only 120-130 messages a minute, maybe if we were doing 200 a minute we might see gain?

The question is with lda we used postfix settings destination_recipient_limit=1, we have not added this with lmtp,is this needed?

This is probably more a question for postfix users list, might explain why noone here answered you, but no its not needed with lmtp, and 2 msgs a second, you want see any benefit over lda unless your running on a 386 :)

-- Regards, Noel Butler

This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate this message without the authors express written authority to do so.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete all copies of this message including attachments immediately. Confidentiality, copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken delivery of this message.

BS. it was a simple question did she need to run this option or not, posting her config is immaterial and a waste of bandwith and everyones time.

I dont do drugs, but dealing with you I think its becoming a requirement so i'll settle for jack daniels black label instead

On 12/06/2021 23:02, Benny Pedersen wrote:

On 2021-06-12 13:42, Noel Butler wrote:

...

off your drugs again benny? WTF should she provide all the config outputs, when she asked a simple question about one option, and WTF clamav came from is beyond me

this is very important AFTER i replayed to help, not BEFORE,

keep your own drugs problems

-- Regards, Noel Butler

This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate this message without the authors express written authority to do so.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete all copies of this message including attachments immediately. Confidentiality, copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken delivery of this message.

On 13 Jun 2021, at 05:17, Benny Pedersen <me@junc.eu> wrote:

i dont reply anymore to you,

Best plan.

-- 'Never build a dungeon you wouldn't be happy to spend the night in yourself,' said the Patrician (...). 'The world would be a happier place if more people remembered that.' --Guards! Guards!

Hi Benny,

On 11.06.21 14:14, Benny Pedersen wrote:

but remember lda, ltmp is both signle recipient

--------------------^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

are you sure?

'postconf -d' says:

lmtp_destination_recipient_limit = $default_destination_recipient_limit default_destination_recipient_limit = 50

@Laura:

The question is with lda we used postfix settings destination_recipient_limit=1, we have not added this with lmtp,is this needed?

AFAIK: no, it isn't.

Regards, Markus