On 2011-05-19 at 12:35 +0100, Dominic Benson wrote: > On 19/05/11 11:50, Phil Pennock wrote: > > > > New queuing system refers to an approach to scale up the spool directory > > to something more queue-like, with segregated admin-defined queues (eg, > > "big_freemail_provider_x"). This is because while Exim is excellent at > > inbound mail, it doesn't always scale as well as some would like for > > outbound mail which can't be immediately delivered. Nothing has been > > done on this. Patches welcome. > > > Is this AKA bug 336? It sounds quite interesting, so I think I might > have a look at making some inroads into the problem. > > If there are are any notes/thoughts about behaviour/config/use it would > be handy to hear them.
I wasn't aware of 336, but yes it's related. At present, there's split_spool_directory, which divides things up with one level of hashing, and then some people script their own queue-runner launchers, running in parallel over sub-trees of the split spool instead of having the Exim daemon launch runners over everything, which compete with each other. Nothing more specific was discussed, that I either recall or find in the minutes; we all understood the general problem. If we use a new sub-directory of spool_directory to hold named queues, then previous Exim installs won't know of the content, but it should be fairly easy to script a rollback tool which recombines queues into the original queue. Thinking briefly (while tired and prone to mistakes): You'd need a way to declare "move this message to this other queue", perhaps a way to restrict Routers to only apply to messages in certain queues (seems optional as a performance optimisation, *could* be useful for some more sophisticated Router rule bifurcations) and either a way to control counts of queue-runners per named queue or an API to do so. Probably best to have a global config option defining a list of allowed queue names, so that a typo doesn't end up putting 100k messages into "gmial" where they sit idle. ;) Beyond that, I think there's a lot of freedom for the implementor to make their own decisions. :) Have at it! -- ## List details at https://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/
