-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Eric Jon Rostetter wrote:
For a massively scaled system, there may be sufficient performance to put the queues elsewhere.
Which also allows that the queue can easily have multiple machines pushing & poping items.
But on a small system, with 90% of the mail being spam/virus/malware, performance will usually dictate local/memory file systems for such queues...
Well, this discussion reads a bit like "local filesystems are prone to loose data on crash". Journaling filesystems, RAID1 / 5 / 10, SANs do their job.
However, I guess that Seth and Timo look at the thing from a different point of view, Timo seems to focus on "one queue - multiple accessees", whereas Seth focuses on temporary working directory.
Bye,
Steffen Kaiser -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iQEVAwUBSoJtbnWSIuGy1ktrAQKj9Af/ajuegRCmDRZq/E7vt3EwDxd6ob8bNaY0 bP0Vu2bs2df/GeGKbrFiOCNyq4NMADTejNie9WQMANSB8dM7qMPjdLD68rbD70+k /UIafifb0fXBlvZTrPvKHGf1grB2qb71NAXhPi0QinbCo1CSdP4+J53XssxElrYD YLpAOBpQFkZ2I3Ji1DDpS4Xu7n0lCG0nf4dB8frtGyBf7BGFis0EpudByAAOMsiJ MesR5jbz3xFD5KM62YWlOyRF/3DaOCSo1DVMg6TG+ddTyulW0mCsxKRQ01Py7khm CKp87ucG77gDR1gn341x7zbhH5TtrC1t4rRzpBBujLDcy8F0DkM4yw== =0WvU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----