Mailing List Archive

running $n$ qmails
Scott Schwartz <schwartz@cse.psu.edu> qmail:
>
>If people are seriously advocating running two copies of qmail, then I
>want all the virtualdomain stuff deleted, since running N copies would
>do the job there too.
>

Huh? Where did you get the idea I was "advocating" that people
run two copies of qmail?

I was *suggesting* it as a *possible* workaround for one particular
problem that was bothering Evan and Chael.

My site supports around a thousand virtual domains. Are you really
suggesting I run a thousand copies of qmail to handle them?

Or are you trying to say the idea of running a second copy of qmail
is a silly one, by carrying it to a silly extreme?

-Greg
--
Greg Andrews West Coast Online
Unix System Administrator 5800 Redwood Drive
gerg@wco.com Rohnert Park CA 94928
(yes, 'greg' backwards) 1-800-WCO-INTERNET
Re: running $n$ qmails [ In reply to ]
Greg Andrews <gerg@wco.com> writes:
| My site supports around a thousand virtual domains. Are you really
| suggesting I run a thousand copies of qmail to handle them?
|
| Or are you trying to say the idea of running a second copy of qmail
| is a silly one, by carrying it to a silly extreme?

Well, both really. I feel like qmail is inconsistent in providing
support for virtual domains, but e.g. not multiple queueing policies.
Why not run $n$ copies of qmail? It's supposed to be lean and
efficient, and with suitable engineering that should be a workable
approach, but I don't think it has in fact been engineered in a way
that will make that feasable, even for $n=2$.