james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noel J. Bergman" <n...@devtech.com>
Subject RE: Processor naming thoughts?
Date Mon, 14 Apr 2003 17:13:34 GMT
Serge,

I agree with the idea of renaming setState to something else.  But I am not
quite convinced that renaming processor to queue will have any beneficial
impact.  The first thing that I think we could do is demonstrate better use
of processors within the stock config.  I've made changes here, for example,
to separate out error, spam, and relay-denied mail.  We could further factor
out, within reason, the mail process to give people a better example of how
to use processors.  As it is, we pretty much have just root, transport,
error and spam.

The tradeoff is that the current architecture is optimized for fewer
processors.  LinearProcessor is pretty tight, but there is overhead going
through the spooler.  However, I think that we can address that issue, and
the benefit of better understanding for the majority of users outweighs the
optimization needs that more expert users can achieve.

	--- Noel


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: james-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: james-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message