Jeremy Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>My remote concurrency is 500, so that's not a problem.
500 is not a magic number guaranteed to be sufficient in all
applications.
>In what I've seen
>and you have to understand, I'm just an admin here, I really have nothing
>to do with the "quality" of the mail addresses that come through
>here. That's a story within itself, but out of 2 million emails, 40% of
>those on average are deferred. That's a lot of emails sitting getting
>retried,
They're only retried when their schedule says it's time to retry them.
>I've often seen my remote concurrency consist completely of
>deferral retries,
That right there says that your concurrencyremote probably isn't high
enough.
>especially of for some reason qmail need to be restarted
>or something...
Restarts are exceptional.
>so if it has to sort through 800,000 mails that may get
>deferred again, that's wasted time and resources.
Yeah, avoid restarts.
>I know I have options, but a deferral host just seems like it would be a
>"nice thing" to have available.
Ah, but qmail was engineered. Dan doesn't throw in every feature that
``just seems like it would be a "nice thing" to have available''. It's
conceivable that a fallback host feature could make sense in some
applications, but I suspect Dan weighed the pros and cons and decided
it wasn't worth the effort.
You can: implement it yourself, switch to a mailer that supports it,
or consider other options with qmail such as calling qmail-remote
directly and queuing to a fallback host if that fails.
-Dave
