On Tue, Aug 07, 2001 at 12:05:12PM +1200, Jason Haar allegedly wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 02:16:00PM +0200, Peter van Dijk wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 01:07:36PM +0100, Richard Underwood wrote:
> > > When the exchange server comes back up, I kick the qmail-send
> > > process to get it to deliver the queue. At this point I should be able to go
> > > off and do other things.
> >
> > Why are you kicking qmail-send? That should never be necessary in a
> > production environment.
>
> It is absolutely necessary.
>
> We have exactly the same issue here. Exchange goes down. Mail backs up on
> Qmail servers. Exchange comes back up. USERS ARE TOLD ITS WORKING AGAIN.
> Users then wonder why it takes up to 2 hours for queued mail to get to them.
> USERS COMPLAIN THAT SOMETHING IS WRONG.
One wonders what your users think of the Exchange server? Love it do they?
Be that as it may, if Exchange is that unreliable, why not change your
qmail server to send to it via serialmail? You'll then get the desired
effect. Trigger it once a minute out of cron or some such.
Just watch out for the possibility of two serialmails running
concurrently on the same Maildir, I recall that djb put locking in to
protect against this, but it may not be immediately obvious.
> Reality is that some things are better at some things than others. Wow -
> there's a shocker :-)
Yeah and qmail can work around unstable Exchange servers. Wow!
Regards.
