On Sun, Jun 06, 2004 at 01:45:06AM +0100, Dimitrios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 20:22:51 -0400 "Theo Van Dinter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We don't do threads in SA. I'm not really sure what else you'd mean by > > "SMP-aware". > I can give an example: > One way to integrate SA into procmail is to use: > :0fw: spamassassin.lock > | /home/user/sausr/bin/spamassassin > If the lock is removed then multiple messages can be > processed at the same time. Thus, the operating system > may execute multiple instances of perl's interpreter > for each spamassassin execution. > > Or am i wrong somewhere here? My only asumption is that > perl's interpreter won't streamline execution within > a single process or thread.
Actually, there's another assumption: that the delivery mechanism is capable of simultaneous delivery without corruption. You've left off all details of the delivery mechanism in your procmail example here, so there's no way to really say. But the mbox format (a very common way of storing mailboxes, used by default in many Linux programs) is NOT safe without an external lock. The major alternative to mbox, Maildir, is safe (when properly implemented). Other mechanisms may vary. So, don't assume it's safe to do this unless you have verified that it's safe on the delivery side, too. -- Matthew Hunter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Public Key: http://matthew.infodancer.org/public_key.txt Homepage: http://matthew.infodancer.org/index.jsp Politics: http://www.triggerfinger.org/index.jsp
