On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 19:58:43 +0100 Michele Laghi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ML> Ciao Michele, ML> in fact there is no mechanism to avoid such "starving" of low priority ML> messages. I believe it is a correct behaviour to priorize high ML> priority ML> messages. If there are no free resources available to sent all ML> messages, ML> then it is correct to hold back low priority messages. ML> Of course you could discuss the fact that messages which are in the ML> queue since a long time become a higher priority but this is a ML> specific ML> behaviour (you could have other such behaviours) which could be solved ML> with a specific plugin. Yes, I thought about that. Some time based or 'number of fetch' operations based mechanism could be implemented which increases the priority of the messages still in the queue. Ciao -- Michele Ravani [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Those who live hoping, die singing" My Gran
