Re: [exim] Doco bug report and wishlist item

Tony Finch wrote:
>
> No. You're confusing the issue of randomization with the issue of
> scanning the whole queue before running it. The code quite clearly
> randomizes the order of the files in a directory.

Peter Bowyer wrote:
>
> You took the description of 'queue_run_in_order' out of context. If
> that option is not set (which is the default), the queue is run in
> 'arbitrary' (= pseudo-random) order.

Hrm. I'll trust both of you that I'm reading the docs wrong, but I
think that Philip should probably add this section to his list of Doc
TODOs for a rewrite, because I'm finding it very confusing. According
to the docs for queue_run_in_order:

> If this option is set, queue runs happen in order of message arrival
> instead of in an arbitrary order. [snip] *When the queue is all in a
> single directory (the default), this happens anyway*, ...

That seems to me to say that the default behaviour is that messages are
delivered out of the queue in arrival order, _unless_ the spool is split
(in which case setting queue_run_in_order makes them deliver in arrival
order again).

- Marc