Jon Carnes wrote:
>
> Wow, what a cool problem... I think that v 2.1 (once it is out of beta) is
> for you.
...
>
> Here is an obscure thought - what if you actually set aside some memory for
> a ram drive - say about 64 Mb and then backed up the directory
> ~mailman/lists/<listname>/.. to the RAM drive, then moved the physical
> mapping of that directory and mapped the RAM drive there.
>
Brilliant idea!! I tried that and it works fine. A new subscribe process
now only needs 1/3 of time inside the system and therefore apache has
almost no need to queue them up. I think that will fill the gap 'til 2.1
THANK YOU VERY MUCH for your "obscure thought"
Juergen
--
novalis media
Ein Bereich der Vereinigte Verlagsanstalten GmbH -
http://www.vva.de
http://www.novalis-media.de
Geschaeftsfuehrer Stefan Meutsch HRB 658 Duesseldorf
------------------------------------------------------
Mailman-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users
Mailman FAQ: http://www.python.org/cgi-bin/faqw-mm.py
