[Mailman-Developers] (no subject)

[J C Lawrence]

On Thu, 14 Dec 2000 14:52:00 -0800 
Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com> wrote:

> one thing I'm doodling with for my SMTP back end is starting up a
> server that places a socket, then starting up "N" SMTP processes
> as clients that grab addresses from the server one at a time for
> delivery. This gets me completely away fro this "slow DNS" stuff,
> since any one slow address slows only itself, and since the system
> I'm looking at is 100% verped/customized (ala Lyris's footers, at
> the minimum), I'm not worrying about the added overhead (you could
> potentially do batches through an interface). using sockets means
> the clients can go off-machine for free, as long as they know
> where to look.

If the number of slow addresses at any instant exceed N th entire
system stops for that period.  The benefit of parallelisation in
this case is that in *general* traffic will cotniue to flow given
one or more bad addresses, and the assumption is that the rate of
bad/slow addresses will never/rarely coincide to the point that the
entire queue is bogged.

> now, maybe it could be something like that, a controlling process
> that uses both threads and forks (and perhaps remote commands
> through rsh or ssh) to spawn instances as needed...

I see this as orthogonal to Mailman or the MLM process.  You could
drop such a solution transparently into the outbound queue process.

-- 
J C Lawrence                                       claw@kanga.nu
---------(*)                          http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/
--=| A man is as sane as he is dangerous to his environment |=--