On Tue, 24 Oct 2006, Philip Hazel wrote:
> >
> > If exim has to look at the file to see if a new
> > delivery attempt is due, would it be faster overall
> > (for queue ops) to instead reflect that information
> > in the -H filename, and just have exim update that as
> > needed?
>
> Impossible. Remember that a message may have multiple recipients, and
> each recipient domain may resolve to multiple IP addresses. Exim looks
> at the file to get the list of recipients; it then uses the routers to
> find the list of IP addresses for each recipient; it then looks in its
> hints database for retry information for each IP address (and
> IP/recipient combinations for recipient errors). The amount of
> potential information is therefore rather more than one could sensibly
> put into a file name.
>
Doh! I hadn't considered that, nor the detail below.
> Furthermore, even if it were only one recipient and one IP address, the
> next delivery due time is not fixed to a message. Consider the common
> "connection failed" case (a host error). If there are 10 messages
> waiting for one host, one delivery is tried when the retry time has
> passed; if that fails, the other 9 messages are not tried at that time.
> (It would be pretty pointless, wouldn't it?)
>
Thanks! (I figured there was some fatal flaw(s) with the idea :)
--
--------------------------------------------------------
Dave Lugo dlugo@??? LC Unit #260 TINLC
Have you hugged your firewall today? No spam, thanks.
--------------------------------------------------------
Are you the police? . . . . No ma'am, we're sysadmins.
