On 2008-07-02 at 00:56 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote: > Suppose I'm willing to accept a few email lost in the event of a crash > and I want speed. Here's what I'd like to see.
Let's hope that any design does not further weaken email by accepting message loss as acceptable. > A message comes in, is completely processed and delivered without > writing to a queue, all in ram. However if the delivery fails on the > first try then the message actually is saved to hard disk. Yes - there > is some exposure to loss of some messages on system crash, and you > accept that as a trade off for speed. In my previous experience, only spammers have been willing to accept that trade-off. Just what the hell are you doing with email provision that randomly lost emails are acceptable? -Phil -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
