Attachment upload speed

Use this forum if you have installed hMailServer and want to ask a question related to a production release of hMailServer. Before posting, please read the troubleshooting guide. A large part of all reported issues are already described in detail here.
Post Reply
User avatar
Jason Weir
Normal user
Normal user
Posts: 58
Joined: 2004-02-02 23:41
Location: Chichester, NH
Contact:

Post by Jason Weir » 2004-06-25 23:48

I'm not having any large attachment problems with ASSP. I started a new thread in the off topic area to see if we can get to the bottom of this. ASSP works so good, lets see if we can get any bugs worked out

http://www.hmailserver.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=422

Thanks
Jason

User avatar
martin
Developer
Developer
Posts: 6837
Joined: 2003-11-21 01:09
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by martin » 2004-06-26 01:51

On my computer it sends a 25 mb attachment in a few seconds. However, I will create a new version this weekend which will have better performance in the SMTP part of the server.

calvi
Normal user
Normal user
Posts: 65
Joined: 2004-03-17 23:34
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by calvi » 2004-06-26 02:33

Sorry Martin,

you can remove tracker 149&150 I ran some proper tests...

http://www.hmailserver.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=422

summary...

1. Sending through ASSP(no Clam)>Worldmail running on ol' pentium = 17 minutes 25s. (don't even bother with clam on, she can't take it captain).
2. Sending direct to Worldmail running on ol' pentium = 40s
3. Receiving from worldmail running on ol' pentium = 25s.
4. Sending through ASSP(no Clam)>hMailserver on Sledgehammer = 21s
5. Sending through ASSP(Clam)>hMailserver on Sledgehammer = 2min 44s.
6. Sending direct to hMailserver on Sledgehammer = 10s.
7. Recieving from hMailserver on Sledgehammer = 3s.

Now bear in mind that all the send times include encoding in outlook and moving the email their respective folders, this was consistent at around 6-7s.


but speed increases are of course always welcome :).

nwkit
Normal user
Normal user
Posts: 133
Joined: 2004-04-19 03:57
Location: Canada

Post by nwkit » 2004-06-26 03:32

i sent 3 files that was 20mb to my hmailserver from a different network..so it was using the internet the whole way...my upload speed was checked to be at my max...around 67kb/s...and i checked my server containing hmailserver..and it was still running smoothly...no big jump of ram usage from hmailserver...it just took a while to send cuz the file was sooo big

the only thing i noticed was that perl was using 35mb ram and apache using like 24mb....but i just checked again..like after several hours i sent the large test email, and the ram usage is at the same place...so not sure if that is relevant or not...

polarunion
Normal user
Normal user
Posts: 245
Joined: 2004-04-05 20:21
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

Post by polarunion » 2004-06-26 07:31

yes, i too experienced elevated ram useage which did not decrease after use.

Checking server resources tonight I noticed hmail at 143Mb. After restarting the service it returned to 4Mb.

Has anyone else looked at the three tests I've performed and were they able to recreate this?

I'm worried of the 12 minutes it takes for OE to handle a message, when it only takes 1.3 for SM and 1.1 for thunderbird. Something isn't right.

Just empty your log for the day and enable smtp filtering. Send a 20 meg file and check it after it completes it send with SM, OE and another mail ap such as thunderbird. Compare the times of the first connection to the 'message queued' line. That will give you a precise difference in time. People should be getting the same ratio as what I've been getting - with deviations dependant on your network speed and server power.

Lastly, compare these with simple file transfer speed capabilities.

Everything up to this point has been relative. If anyone has any other suggestions on what I might try to improve upload speeds, I'm all ears. Thanks for your efforts all. I'm sure we can fix this.

User avatar
martin
Developer
Developer
Posts: 6837
Joined: 2003-11-21 01:09
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by martin » 2004-06-26 12:40

I have dome some changes that will decrease memory usage. A new version will be put up in the weekend or on monday.

In the next version, the "Message queued" line includes the time in milliseconds the data transfer took. Will be easier to get exact measurments of the time with this.

User avatar
martin
Developer
Developer
Posts: 6837
Joined: 2003-11-21 01:09
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by martin » 2004-06-27 17:13

The new version is up. Would be interesting to compare some numbers.
On my computer, a delivery of a 25 mb attachment takes about 8 seconds.

There's a new setting in hmailserver.ini:

Code: Select all

[Settings]
SocketBufferSize=40000
This settings says how many bytes the internal buffer should be when sending and receiving data. If it's not set, the default value is 40 000. If I increase this value from 40 000 to 100 000, the above delivery takes 5 seconds instead of 8. Changing the value requires server restart.

(I'm not sure what the best default value for this setting is yet. The higher the default value, the more memory will the server use. )

The new version also includes a small feature in the logs. The message queued now looks like this:

Code: Select all

250 Message queued (6.159 seconds)
(The time is the time it took for the data to be delivered from the client to the server.)

I suggest you try the new version and try to send the message with OE again. And check the Message queued line for the exact delivery time.

polarunion
Normal user
Normal user
Posts: 245
Joined: 2004-04-05 20:21
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

Post by polarunion » 2004-06-28 18:44

wow, that's pretty cool that you've done that. I'll try it later tonight.. Thanks for the upgrade and for taking the time to look into this. I'll keep you up to date on how it's working for me.

polarunion
Normal user
Normal user
Posts: 245
Joined: 2004-04-05 20:21
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

Post by polarunion » 2004-06-30 21:28

UNBELIEVABLE!


Update:::


I've just tested the times for the latest hmailserver release and received great times and great results..

To get these results I installed Perl 5.6 instead of the 5.8 - couldn't tell you if this makes a difference because I also upgraded ASSP to Calvi's modded ASSP and I'm now using the HMail 25 build.

using the same attachment as the tests before along with the same Squirrelmail and Outlook E. Ii was able to attain the following results.

Hmailserver build 25 - ClamAv Scan
No ASSP

OE - 14.481 Seconds - down from 10 minutes!!!!
SM - 19.358 Seconds - down from a minute and a half.

John Calvi's ASSP Mod SMTP Proxy - No AV scan
Hmailserver build 25 - ClamAv Scan

OE - 87.806 seconds
SM - 90.600 seconds



Memory usage was constant at about 4.5Mb-7.5Mb

I can't tell you how pleased I am with these results. I can't thank Martin/John enough.

We just have to work on virus protection on hmail's side because I think it would handle it more efficiently than ASSP's integration with ClamAv which as we all know is notoriously slow.

Cheers - Pat

Post Reply