"Jason R. Mastaler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tim Legant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I think that's an interesting compromise. If there are no wildcards, > > a search is easy. > > What I'm concerned about is sites who opt to use TMDA with SQL-only > running into performance problems. I'd hate to have to recommend > dumping lists out of SQL into a CDB or DBM just to increase > performance. > > Also, my gut feeling is that most TMDA users do not use wildcards > anyway. Now that we can store both email addresses /and/ domains in a > hashed database, we have nearly the same functionality of wildcards > with none of the performance penalties. I think most large sites > would opt for this as a compromise.
So, we want to do a database search unless -wildcards is specified, for performance reasons... > > because firstmatch() is called once for each recipient in > > tmda-inject, the database would be hit each time. > > Yes, that's true, but I think this is the correct behavior, even if it > does impose an additional performance penalty. In typical usage > though, most messages have only one recipient. but ignore performance on outgoing mail, because most likely sites that are large enough for this to make a difference won't be using outgoing TMDA anyhow. Ok. I haven't added the -domains support either, but I will. That should mitigate some of the wildcard issues too, as you pointed out. Tim _________________________________________________ tmda-workers mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-workers
