On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Jules Agee wrote: > from what I understand it's not easy to fix this without creating > performance problems.
Actually, it should be easy (but NOT trivial) as long as you do it on memory only. Maybe it could even be used to help syncronize the seen state (to give us a no-performance-loss outcrook fix), and to promote idled-like functionality to a safe default. You add a hashed table in a shared-memory pool to keep all the state you want to track globally, and make the services look syncronizing state for a mailbox there first, and take the performance-hungry syncronizing path only if it is set. It requires proper atomic semasphores and real shared memory to work, though. Of course, only volatile state must be kept in such a table. For what you want, one would store in the table a semaphore (hash key is the message-id) that warns other lmtpds when one is doing a delivery database update for a given mailbox, and use it as a spinlock IF doing duplicate suppression (in fact, since the flag implies that the message HAS been seen, instead of spinning, just duplicate-suppress it immediately). -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh ---- Cyrus Home Page: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyruswiki.andrew.cmu.edu List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
