RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Logging optimization question

2003-06-09 Thread Charles Frolick
- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 8:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Logging optimization question Scott, since we have been discussing optimization techniques on this list lately, I am wondering

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Logging optimization question

2003-06-09 Thread John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
Speaking of logging, would it be possible to add using a syslog daemon as an option, I don't know off hand if it will save any processing power, but it seems like it might since you will no longer have to manage log file resources (locking, checking creation, destination folder). It would

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Logging optimization question

2003-06-09 Thread R. Scott Perry
Speaking of logging, would it be possible to add using a syslog daemon as an option, I don't know off hand if it will save any processing power, but it seems like it might since you will no longer have to manage log file resources (locking, checking creation, destination folder). This is in the

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Logging optimization question

2003-06-08 Thread Markus Gufler
I've seen that on our server a lot of DNS-based tests bring up very few positive results. So I've commentet them out at the moment. If I'm able to implement something to switch automaticaly between a normal- and a high-load-version of the cfg-file I will disable this tests at first in the