[Raw Msg Headers][Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: transports directory

On Wed, 5 Jul 1995 Nicholas_Briggs.PARC@xerox.com wrote:

> No.
> The transport directory provides a single place where all the files that are
> separated and classified under the scheduler/* directories can be found.
> Consider the case of a message that is to be delivered by two different
> transports -- you want the same control file in each of the scheduler
> subdirectories.   Hard links are made from the transports directory to each of
> the different scheduler subdirectories.  It makes the code much easier to
> manage if you've got a "home" for the files separate from the scheduler
> subdirectories.

  I'm still not convinced that both the $POSTOFFICE/scheduler/* hierarchy 
and $POSTOFFICE/transport directory is needed.  I should have been more 
clear in my original message that my point was the duplication between 
the transport directory and scheduler directory system.  It would seem 
that it would not be that difficult to eliminate one or the other.  It 
would seem that the best bet would be the elimination of the channel 
directories in the scheduler directory and keep the transports 
directory.  I don't see a problem with maintaining a single trasnport 
queue for multiple transports.

  Any other thoughts on this?