On Thu, 2004-05-27 at 06:21, Ilja Booij wrote: > Aaron Stone wrote: > > Also, the entire message is now be read into memory. I'm starting to believe > > that even 128MB is a generous maximum for message sizes, which means that > > "huge" messages could still fit easily into RAM on most servers where DBMail > > would be deployed, but I'm not convinved that it's a good idea in the long > > run. Breaking things up as they come means that we don't care how big a > > message is just as long as the database has storage space for it. > > That was a completely unilateral decision on my part. I figured that > we're storing emails, not just some arbitrary data. I don't think we > have to take care of messages larger than, say, 128MB. Most ISP don't > accept messages larger than 4MB, IIRC. We should put a configurable > (using dbmail.conf) limit on the message size, and load it with a > sensible default.
Question, what happens on a server with lots of users where the server could possibly simultaneouly receive 10 unrelated 128M emails thus dbmail would be using 1G of RAM. Do we think this is OK?
