> From: Peter van Dijk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 01:07:36PM +0100, Richard Underwood wrote:
>
> > When the exchange server comes back up, I kick the qmail-send
> > process to get it to deliver the queue. At this point I should be able
to go
> > off and do other things.
>
> Why are you kicking qmail-send? That should never be necessary in a
> production environment.
>
Life with qmail, 1.5.8 and E.1. - qmail backs off. When a server
comes back up, I want the queued mail there ASAP. If the exchange server has
been down for more than half an hour, you're looking at unacceptable delays.
(Unacceptable to the company, that is.)
> If this box' only function is relaying to the exchange server, why not
> set concurrencyremote to 20?
>
It's not the only function of the server. Even if it was, that's a
hack. It's a workable solution, but also a hack. I could install another
qmail instance, but then that's worse in my opinion.
> Have you tried not kicking it at all? qmail has a very efficient retry
> schedule, that doesn't even bog down heavily loaded servers.
>
I've not, for the reason given above. What I described was just an
example of what can happen to illustrate my point. I've seen similar
problems without kicking the queue, but nothing so clear or repeatable. I
was just giving an example of where qmail doesn't act 'perfectly'.
> Lots of patches satisfy needs easily fixed without patches. Lots of
> patches satisfy needs that only a few users have.
>
Oh, I quite agree. Apart from my server where I run virtual domains,
I use qmail out of the box. (Actually, one server now has the keep-alives
patch happily installed.)
> And if you don't like this behaviour: write a patch (or find one), or
> stop using qmail. Nobody is forcing you to use qmail.
>
Perhaps, but using this list to tell people (often quite forcefully)
that the behaviour they are experiencing is as it should be, and it's the
rest of the world that's broken, and that qmail is perfect already isn't
going to encourage anyone to help.
If I had the time, I'd write a patch. I wouldn't do it without
discussing it on a mailing list first, though ... Has it been suggested/done
before? Does anyone have any suggestions for better algorithms? What
features would people want?
But I don't think I will. Even suggesting that there was an issue (I
didn't say bug, and I didn't say problem, I said issue) with qmail resulted
in some very abrupt replies, telling me that I was wrong, and qmail was
perfect.
This stifles discussion. The "nobody is forcing you" cliche makes
things worse. I personally think qmail is great, and will always use it -
but all this makes me less willing to contribute - if the (apparent) general
consensus is that people are happy with qmail as it is, then I'll leave you
all in peace. I've got enough servers to split tasks up, a patch would be
good, but I may as well tailor it to my needs and not bother sharing it.
I wonder how many other people have been put off like that?
I think I've been quite reasonable with the messages I've sent. I've
said that I like qmail numerous times. I've said I want to improve it ...
and people have told me it needs no improvement. I simply think that this is
short-sighted.
I'll leave you all alone now.
Richard
