On 8/31/2010 4:05 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-08-31 5:20 AM, Fritz Borgstedt<[email protected]>  wrote:
>> For Users of ASSP<[email protected]>  schreibt:
>>> Does this mean my recipient validation needs to be adjusted - this
>>> ldaplist.notfound is now 14k in size, while my ldaplist only has the
>>> dozen entries appropriate for my domain?
>> No, it means, that ASSP is trying to reduce the load by caching the
>> misses in recipient validation.
> Maybe those type files would be better named something more generic and
> more descriptive, like:
>
> mapname-neg.cache
>
> Then of course you could have
>
> mapname-pos.cache
>
Found and notfound are clear enough - I just needed to confirm that the 
size of the notfound file was appropriate.

What might be helpful would be to add a note to ldapnotfounddb, 
something like, "If LDAP is used for recipient validation, this file may 
contain a relatively large number of invalid addresses."

Curiously, I also noticed my ldapnotfounddb is set to the default value 
(because I never changed it) of "ldapnotfound".  However, the file on my 
hard drive is "ldaplist.notfound".  Using version 1.7.5.7(1.0.07) via 
auto-update.
-- 
Daniel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net Dev2Dev email is sponsored by:

Show off your parallel programming skills.
Enter the Intel(R) Threading Challenge 2010.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-thread-sfd
_______________________________________________
Assp-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user

Reply via email to