> On Tuesday, August 14, 2012 6:19 PM, Viktor Dukhovni
> <postfix-us...@dukhovni.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 07:18:09PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
>> > I read somewhere on this list that it's not necessary to use
> proxymap
>> > for transport table lookups.
>>
>> It is undesirable with the current architecture, because it increases
>> latency for the single-process queue manager service. The queue
>> manager read-waits for single stream of trivial-rewrite replies,
>> and trivial-rewrite does the transport table lookups. A little
>> latency for a multi-service process such as smtpd or cleanup would
>> be less of a problem.
>>
>> The same holds for using SQL or LDAP instead of a local transport
>> map. Extra latency is bad for queue manager performance.
>>
>> In a future architecture, it may be possible to do multiple
>> trivial-rewrite requests in parallel (either in the queue manager
>> itself or in a bunch of queue manager helper processes). That should
>> reduce the impact of proxymap latency, but it won't necessarily
>> eliminate the latency of SQL or LDAP-based transport maps.
>
> I would also note that trivial-rewrite(8) (like proxymap(8)) is
> already a multi-client service, so typically, there are a lot fewer
> trivial-rewrite(8) processes than smtpd(8)'s or cleanup(8)'s.
> Therefore any savings in further consolidating database connections
> are likely offset by unnecessary indirection.
>
> So bottom-line, don't use proxymap for tables that are used only
> by trivial-rewrite(8). We could perhaps make Postfix ignore proxymap
> in trivial-rewrite(8), but it is not clear that this would not be
> surprising to a lot of people...
Is there anywhere to find a list of the tables used by
a process like trivial-rewrite?
