On Fri, 21 Jan 2000 11:38:16 -0800 , Mark Delany writes:
[double-deliveries + header rewriting]
> Right. It sure is something people can do and I think that
> @fixme accurately alludes to the general nature of things,
> but it's not clear to me how this got specifically bound to
> questions relating to a high-volume box.
Well, I brought it up because header rewriting
affects qmail's performance under high-volume --
it's not a graceful degradation, but more like
"hitting a wall."
I guess my point was this: if you don't do anything
fancy, i.e. your box does not do forwarding, rewriting,
etc., then setting up a high-volume qmail server is
pretty straightforward.
If your setup requires forwarding and header rewriting
(as mine does), then making a qmail server "high volume"
takes a fair amount of hacking[1].
--
Chris Mikkelson | If you throw your bread upon the waters, it shall come
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | back threefold, but only if you are willing to throw the
| recipe upon the waters as well... -- Terry Lambert
[1] As I keep telling the sendmail bigots around
the office, hacking qmail source and hacking
sendmail.cf are roughly equal in complexity (although
qmail source is written in a real language).
