Forum OpenACS Q&A: Re: Qmail vs. Postfix

Collapse
10: Re: Qmail vs. Postfix (response to 1)
Posted by Torben Brosten on
re: why is (was) Qmail part of the OpenACS reference platform and not Postfix?

Andrew Piskorski offers these insights about why qmail was used directly:

https://openacs.org/forums/message-post?parent_id=80275

https://openacs.org/forums/message-post?parent_id=81295

Collapse
11: Re: Qmail vs. Postfix (response to 10)
Posted by Tom Ayles on

Torben - I guess the first link is kind of related to my statement that qmail is used 'because it is': perhaps based more on the historical situation than the present. Certainly back in the day there was less competition, but now it seems as though there is little to distinguish between Postfix, qmail, exim, or whatever (except sendmail, which is mostly evil).

The second link interests me - is qmail-inject still used by anyone? I couldn't see any reference except in qmail-procs.tcl in ecommerce, and Bart said earlier that ecommerce doesn't depend on qmail. The reason it interests me is because earlier I came across a post comparing the performance of qmail/postfix/sendmail. The opinion there was that 'if you're using VERP (Variable Envelope Return Path), postfix is a little faster than qmail. if you're not using VERP, postfix is *MUCH* faster than qmail'. From this it seems as though sending a mail out to multiple recipients in a single SMTP session would be as efficient or more efficient than using qmail-inject.