> > > If they all retry at once, they must all have the same queue runner > > > interval. Instead of, say, 15 minutes for them all, does it help to have > > > a spread such as 13, 15, 17 ? > > > > In fact, their configuration is identical, which is very convenient > > for a cluster. I would like to keep it that way and avoid expanded > > retry rules. ;) > > Queue runner start times are not specified in retry rules.
I misread your mail and thought about different retry intervals. Right now queue runners start every 15s, but I am thinking about migrating those machines to the parallel queue runner I run on my outgoing systems. As I wrote, I don't see a sharply defined collision, but it is like waves of many and of few transferred mails. That's why it took me a while to understand why sometimes the previously down machine was not loaded as badly, when there was still mail waiting. There is a bunch things that could avoid this problem, but thinking about it, I found out that in fact things run more synchronised than one would guess. Michael -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
