On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 09:37:23AM +0000, Philip Hazel wrote:
> A thought: I wonder, from your previous mention of queue runners, if you
> think that the queue runner is the *only* way messages are delivered? If
> so, you haven't quite understood the way Exim (as normally configured)
> works. If 20 messages arrive at once, all 20 will immediately be
> delivered, using up to 40 simultaneous outgoing connections (with
> remote_max_parallel at the default of 2). The queue runners work only on
> messages that have previously had a temporary delivery error.
Is there any reason why local delivery is single treaded ? With modern
multi CPU/core machines is might be nice to have a local_max_parallel
option. Especially where address expansion results in lots of local addresses.
This is my situation -- 4 CPU box & local delivery is to cyrus which will have 'wait'
time while it is speaking to active directory; so a certain amount of parallel
local delivery (in addition to batch_max) would probably make sense.
PS: in answer to my question that kicked this thread off, my current worst case expansion
works like a dream, some 8,500 local addresses. 'current' since I think that this
may rise.
--
Alain Williams
Linux Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT Lecturer.
+44 (0) 787 668 0256
http://www.phcomp.co.uk/
Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information:
http://www.phcomp.co.uk/contact.php
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
