[Raw Msg Headers][Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: parallel smtp sessions to same target ost
> Morning, oh, gosh, time flies on Friday -- goodday,
> Once firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > We could solve this by having a way to build separate threads
> > based not only on channel+host pair, but also to some other
> > criteria -- like size-bins ? How you would configure them ?
> Perfect solution.
> or if nothing is specified, then minsize=0, maxsize=0 -- any
Single scalars ? I was thinking more of bins:
sizebins="4 64 1000 0" # Bin upper bound values in kilobytes
# "0" is magic meaning "no limit"
That way messages with sizes up to this much (what is message
size anyway ? headers + body ? Or headers + body + envelope ?)
are stored into same bin. When no sizebins are defined, all
messages are stored into the same bin.
> > Things are simplified, if the selection criteria is same for
> > all recipients on same channel+host pairs within one message.
> > I mean that it should place all recipients at same host into
> > same thread. If it doesn't, well, scheduler and transport-
> > agent protocols need major overhaul job...
> Well, size sorting criteria is the most perfect thing i can
> think of regarding this problem.
> > I don't have time to look at that code before week 6, after
> > I have returned from RIPE meeting at Amsterdam.
> Great, lets have zmailer international development meeting
> here :) You drink beer Matti? Remember Columbus?
Shudder... -- no, I have not tasted it, but prospects of
drinking large amounts of alcohol are not my idea about a
good evening. At home (or with friends) I usually serve
myself a half-a-shot (2 cl) of cognac, for example.
Also I am supposedly on diet trying to drop two of my 15
stones of weight (for imperially challenged, your UNIXes
have 'units' command, ask 'stones' vs, 'kg' -- or vs.
Yes, definitely I am willing to taste it, but not overdo it :)