Is he seriously contending that with such a rapid flurry of mail coming
through the pipe, that it would be safer to append mails to open files,
possibly concurrently?
I'm no genius but it seems to me that if a Mailbox is open and you are
writing to it, and another process is also writing to it, that that is when
problems could occur.
Isn't that the kind of thing that makes Maildirs so great?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam D. McKenna [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, July 01, 1999 9:45 AM
> To: Dave Sill
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: maildir format delivery problems?
>
>
> Well, from what I've gleaned by reading this list, Crispin has no
> interest in
> supporting maildirs because he has a grudge against either qmail or djb.
>
> Besides that, it's obvious that he's not interested in improving
> his product.
> He doesn't even use autoconf for god's sake.. When I compile
> PINE on debian
> I have to manually edit the makefile so that it compiles with
> ncurses instead
> of termcap..
>
> --Adam
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 01, 1999 at 09:19:58AM -0400, Dave Sill wrote:
> > "David Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >He says that Maildir is unsuitable for large servers because the
> > >filesytems serialize creation and deletion of files in a single file
> > >system, because the inode and free block tables have to be
> > >manipulated.
> >
> > Yes, that's what makes maildirs reliable. TANSTAAFL
> >
> > >Thus the file creation part of Maildir drivery ends up being
> > >serialized and you spend all your time in the filesystem. He states
> > >problems with servers processing more than a few hundred messages per
> > >second (300+ or so).
> >
> > That's a pretty high rate of delivery. Any server delivery nearly that
> > much mail would surely be delivering to multiple file systems.
> >
> > -Dave
>
