On 1 Dec 2005 at 15:29, Nelson R. Pardee <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Francoise Becker wrote: > > >On 1 Dec 2005 at 12:13, Nelson R. Pardee <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > >> But I'm still puzzled because, for example, I see failures > >> for one address every day all month, but it isn't deleted. So the Delay(5) > >> should catch the person regardless of the MAX(100). > > > >I'd have to see more details to diagnose that specific problem. > > Be glad to do it. What is needed? Well, to start with, a recent Error Monitoring report that shows it's been recording bounces for over 5 days for that address and the results of a QUERY on the subscription for another. If you have changelogs enabled, a check of the changelog entries for that address over the last month may or may not be instructive. > >However, if specifically the *probe* processing is causing > >performance problems, you can change the Probe rate on the Auto- > >Delete= keyword so that fewer addresses get probed each day. > > > >If your site isn't running HPO, you should consider upgrading to HPO > >as well. > > Our cpu utilization on the box averages less than 5%. This is by far our > most active large list (those that are larger are once a day distribution > lists). I wouldn't mind going to HPO, but I don't have a compelling case > to take to management, at least yet. You should start by reducing the probing rate anyway. Is the list set to Mail-merge=Yes, by any chance? That would increase the number of probes, because then every message would be a probe instead of just max one probe per day per person. -- Francoise Becker <[log in to unmask]> Knowledge is just a click away: http://www.lsoft.com/optin.html