Re: [exim-dev] Old topic again: Option to avoid fsync()?

> > I don't use Exim queue runners for larger systems, because they do
> > not scale with a growing queue.
>
> Hmm, so what are we talking about then? :o)

Exim queue runners don't deliver mails on their own, but spawn children
doing that. Your suggestion is to use a new flag that queue runners
had to pass to those children, and of course exim had to check if that
flag had been passed by a non-admin user. That works, but it is more
work to be sure you get it all right.

That's why I suggested a configuration file option. Only admins can
change it and any exim process has the same, consistent view of the
configuration.

I don't use n queue runners that scan the queue in an uncoordinated
manner, thus frequently colliding with each other, but one script that
enumerates the queue once and keeps n parallel deliveries running.
In fact, n plus a few more (one delivery may trigger further deliveries).
The actual delivery process wouldn't know the difference. You can
do nice things that way.

> Well, you can of course disable regular queueruns while messing around.
> The listening daemon may make some problems, but you can (re)start it
> with "-odq" at least.

If there is any way to still accept new messages, I do that, because
otherwise I hurt whoever wants to send them.

> > Ah, the joy of "distributions".
>
> I just thought it won't hurt to ask...

It's a valid question and I am surprised for good to hear Debian
is likely to follow Philip not compiling that extension by default.

Michael