Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: > Aaron Stone wrote: >> The next big project is multithreading the daemons. Even if that's the >> only change that is made, I think it will take a while to get right. Of >> course I'm open to different ideas, and I'm researching threading >> frameworks that we can leverage to reduce our development time. Anyways, >> getting into those details we should move onto the dbmail-dev list. > > > May I ask why this is important? Threads aren't the end-all-be-all that > lots people think they are. I believe a multi-process system can be > every bit as fast as a threaded server, and it's a lot less complicated.
Using threading is not a goal in itself, but a means. One of the goals for 2.3+ is adding new imap capabilities like NOTIFY that require a lot of IPC between running imapd processes. Using threads will make that quite straightforward. Another goal is scaling up the number of concurrent connected clients without depleting the database connections. Using connection pools is a best practice there, and even though that could be done in a multi-process architecture, this is generally done using threads. So yes, imo also there's a very solid case for threads in dbmail. But like Aaron says, it will take some time to do this right. Neither I nor Aaron (afaik) have any experience with threads in C so we'll have to learn how to do it as we go along :-) -- ________________________________________________________________ Paul Stevens paul at nfg.nl NET FACILITIES GROUP GPG/PGP: 1024D/11F8CD31 The Netherlands________________________________http://www.nfg.nl _______________________________________________ DBmail mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.fastxs.nl/mailman/listinfo/dbmail
