[exim] Re: -qq vs. -q

On 2004-11-09, Philip Hazel <ph10@???> wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, John Goerzen wrote:
>
> the time. For those messages that fail, Exim remembers which host they
> are destined for, and does send multiple messages over one connection if
> possible, later.

So, in the standard situation -- where most messages are successfully
delivered immediately -- -q and -qq would be functionally equivolent,
since failures are batched up anyway?

That leads me to another question: let's say I have a mailing list
delivering mail to 1000 people, and a default Exim configuration (send
immediately). Would these deliveries happen serially -- that is,
person 900 would have to wait until all the earlier people on the list
got their mail? Would a queue runner process that got kicked off later
be able to deliver the message to some people, even while the intial
"immediate" delivery process is still running? (Assume nothing weird
like VERP that would queue an individual message per recipient.)

> In practice, however, I think many people just go with the standard
> defaults.

Great. Thanks for the helpful answers.

-- John