Re: [exim] Should queue processing be rewritten in Exim?

On 2008-07-02 at 00:56 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> Suppose I'm willing to accept a few email lost in the event of a crash
> and I want speed. Here's what I'd like to see.

Let's hope that any design does not further weaken email by accepting
message loss as acceptable.

> A message comes in, is completely processed and delivered without
> writing to a queue, all in ram. However if the delivery fails on the
> first try then the message actually is saved to hard disk. Yes - there
> is some exposure to loss of some messages on system crash, and you
> accept that as a trade off for speed.

In my previous experience, only spammers have been willing to accept
that trade-off. Just what the hell are you doing with email provision
that randomly lost emails are acceptable?

-Phil