Re: Sendmail with deliver, procmail, or mailagent?
Scott K. Ellis <firstname.lastname@example.org> http://www.gate.net/~storm/
On 9 Oct 1997, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> Scott Ellis <email@example.com> writes:
> > On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, Raul Miller wrote:
> > > Scott Ellis <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > > My primary concern here is that spawning an extra shell process for each
> > > > mail delivery increases mail delivery overhead dramatically. I'd prefer
> > > > sendmail's current knowledge of what it is delivering to, so it can
> > > > support its features directly. Thinking about it, I believe deliver and
> > > > procmail need slightly different feature listings for sendmail, which
> > > > would make a generic script even more sub-optimal.
> > >
> > > Then don't spawn an extra process. Shell scripts that execute a single
> > > command can use "exec".
> > The problem is that the shell process needs to run so it knows to run
> > exec. Sendmail at the moment doesn't need that shell process, so invoking
> > it is overhead we don't need.
> So write a tiny C program that does the same thing as the tiny shell
> script. It wouldn't be that difficult and the overhead would be
> greatly lessened.
Still the extra spawn overhead. Letting sendmail know about it is a
better option less likely to break anything.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .