[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason R. Mastaler) writes: > [ ... ] > > So I'm thinking of writing my own SMTP proxy, using some of the > techniques I've learned over the past few years working on a terascale > message passing library at my day job, for example -- > > - Concurrency, using very lightweight (non-OS) threads, and where > processes communicate using asynchronous message passing without > sharing memory. This would allow for great scalability out of the > box on a single server, and optionally a distributed configuration > where you could run the software on multiple servers, or "nodes", > and the workload would be distributed amongst them transparently. > > - First class fault tolerance, using process monitoring, and in a > distributed installation where processes would fail-over to other > nodes and then automatically migrate back to recovered nodes. > > - Incremental code loading and "hot swapping" so that the software > never needs to be HUP'd, stopped or restarted. Configurations can > be changed, new plugins removed or inserted, and even the software > itself upgraded to a new version without stopping it. It'll be > designed to "run forever", except for hardware or electrical > failures. > > Now the question is whether I'll ever have the time to start such a > beast. :-)
Well, if you do have time, I think that this would be an amply worthwhile project. Are you thinking of replacing the yucky perl code with yucky python code? :) ... or would it be in C with the plugins being native, dynamically loaded modules? Seriously, I don't think that python is all that yucky. I'm just wondering how scalable such a proxy would be if it was written in an interpreted language. -- Lloyd Zusman [EMAIL PROTECTED] God bless you. _________________________________________________ tmda-workers mailing list ([email protected]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-workers
