[Mailman-Developers] Thoughts on splitting qrunner

[Chuq Von Rospach]

At 2:02 PM -0500 12/8/00, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
>I like it a lot.  This could also help us move away from the one-shot
>process architecture we currently have.

It gives us a lot of possibility down the road.

>  queue-mom (I love that name,
>even if it doesn't quite capture what this thing is becoming :)

heh. I'm writing (slowly) a replacement for bulk_mailer for some of 
my systems, and it's code-name is maildude....it was originally 
queuemon (queue monitor), until I ripped all the queueing out of it 
and went with QPS (why write a queueing systme when you can borrow 
one off the shelf?)

>  could
>include the watchdog features to make sure any long-running processes
>are still running.  Kind of the init of Mailman.

that's the paradigm I wanted. not cron, but inetd. And that concept 
might help us get away fro the idea of spawning processes every 
minute, too -- make them persistent and sleeping, with a watchdog to 
restart if they die.

-- 
Chuq Von Rospach - Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com)
Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com)

We're visiting the relatives. Cover us.