On Sun, May 12, 2002 at 05:28:27PM +1000, Daniel Pittman wrote:
> > However, since we're going to do up to 10 queries, and each can be
> > blocking, wouldn't it be better to fork for each DNS lookup (even
> > optionally) and kill the children if the DNS query hasn't returned in
> > x seconds?
>
> Why? Does having the process sitting there and sleeping on the socket
> really take that much of a chunk of your systems resources?
No, but I do care about how long it took for SA to return.
If it takes 20 secs instead of 1-3 once in a while, I don't care, and I know
that it doesn't take more resources, but when it takes a minute, 3, or gets
killed because it didn't return after 5, that's a problem for me.
Honestly, even if you don't put SA in your MTA at SMTP time, users get upset
when on your LAN, they didn't receive an Email after a minute.
They are used for (at least internal) Email to take seconds.
> > That way, since all the DNS queries are run in parallel, at worst, you
> > spend x seconds, not some unknown and unbounded amount of time.
>
> This increases the complexity and resource utilization of SpamAssassin
> quite a bit.
Somewhat, that's correct. It should be optional, I agree, but I'd much
rather pay that hit than having Email time out because SA didn't return
after several minutes.
Marc
--
Microsoft is to operating systems & security ....
.... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/ | Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP key
_______________________________________________________________
Have big pipes? SourceForge.net is looking for download mirrors. We supply
the hardware. You get the recognition. Email Us: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
