From: "David Dyer-Bennet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:49:00 -0500 (CDT)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 17 August 2000 at 11:32:00 -0700
> I can't see much harm in being able to define the queuelifetime on
> an individual submission - perhaps limited to between 0 and some
> multiple of control/queuelifetime.
The harm is in the increased complexity of the queue itself, and in
the programs that manage and access it. Increased complexity costs in
reliability, security, and resources consumed.
I do agree that that feature has some benefit. I'm doubtful it's
worth the cost, but I have little idea what the cost would *actually*
be. Remember that there'd have to be some way to get the information
passed to the queueing engine, too.
I think my patch shows the actual cost of this feature. It is
non-zero, but is not high.
The information is passed via the environment variable
QMAILQUEUELIFETIME to qmail-inject, which uses a new code (L) in the
todo file. qmail-send moves this new code over to the info file, and
honors it when bouncing messages.
Ian
