On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 03:36:02PM +0000, MarkD wrote: [snip] > It'll be interesting to see how you propose to atomically make such > queue changes while incurring a worthwhile queueing cost saving. I have no such proposal. I just feel that with some changes to the queueing structure, this might be feasible. On a 100mbyte mail, this saves reading+writing 100mbyte when a mail is forwarded. Greetz, Peter -- Against Free Sex! http://www.dataloss.nl/Megahard_en.html
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... Philip Mak
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... Peter van Dijk
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... MarkD
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... Peter van Dijk
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... MarkD
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... Peter van Dijk
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mail For... Peter van Dijk
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... MarkD
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... Peter van Dijk
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... MarkD
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... Peter van Dijk
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... Adrian Ho
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... Philip Mak
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... Peter van Dijk
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... Philip Mak
- Re: Fastforward question (was Re: Mai... MarkD
- Re: Mail Forwarding Service cfm
