On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 02:13:47PM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote:
I've been thinking about this issue, and was wondering if it would be
possible to fix this in some simple way. Would it be possible to modify
If one has big-todo, is there any point in spending so much time
working the todo?
On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 01:50:36AM -0700, Sean Reifschneider wrote:
On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 02:13:47PM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote:
I've been thinking about this issue, and was wondering if it would be
possible to fix this in some simple way. Would it be possible to modify
If one has
. Thus even with each qmail instance giving me a low concurrency,
I am achieving high concurrency by running 5 instances of qmail
- Original Message -
From: Peter van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 6:04 PM
Subject: Re: qmail-send progress w
Peter van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 01:50:36AM -0700, Sean Reifschneider wrote:
On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 02:13:47PM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote:
I've been thinking about this issue, and was wondering if it would be
possible to fix this in some simple way. Would
David Dyer-Bennet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Peter van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
With or without big-todo, you risk ending up with a f*cking big todo
queue after that. Switching off todo-handling for a while,
automatically, sounds like a *very* bad idea to me.
Why is a fscking big
On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 02:06:52PM -0500, Dave Sill wrote:
qmail-send won't
dispatch messages to qmail-local or qmail-remote while there are
messages in queue/todo.
I've been thinking about this issue, and was wondering if it would be
possible to fix this in some simple way. Would it be
